Volume 2
Sections 3-5
SELECTED TECHNICAL REFERENCES
AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
Prepared in Conjunction With
Report to Congress
Class V Injection Wells
•	Current Inventory
•	Effects on Groundwater
•	Technical Recommendations
Compiled For
U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C.
November, 1987
Respectfully Submitted By:
ENGINEERING
ENTERPRISES, INC.
WATER RESOURCES SPECIALISTS
Under EPA Contract No. 68-03-3416
Assignment No. 0-5

-------
SELECTED TECHNICAL REFERENCES
AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
Volume 2
Sections 3-5
Prepared in Conjunction With
Report to Congress
Class V Injection Wells
o Current Inventory
o Effects on Groundwater
o Technical Recommendations
November 19 87

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
Foreward		xv
Acknowledgements		xvi
SECTION 1	INTRODUCTION	 1 - 1
1.1	Objective and Scope	 1-1
1.2	Background	 1-1
1.3	Contents of Report	 1-1
SECTION 2	DRAINAGE WELLS	 2-1
2.1	Agricultural Drainage Wells (5F1)... 2-2
2.1.1	*"Identified Class V Injection
Well Inspection Reports,"
An Assessment of Class V
Wells in Georgia	 2 - 3
2.1.2	A Synopsis of Material from Two
Texas Department of Water Reports
Dealing in Part with Agricultural
Drainage Wells in that State	 2-28
2.1.3	Iowa Agricultural Drainage Well
Assessment Report	 2-33
2.1.4	*From Inventory of Class V
Injection Wells in the State of
Colorado	 2 - 64
2.1.5	Assessment of Agricultural Return
Flow Wells in Arizona	 2-83
2.1.6	*Assessment of Wells Used for
Recharge of Irrigation Wastewater
in California	 2 - 146
2.1.7	A Synopsis of Reports on
Agricultural Drainage Wells in
Idaho Prepared by the Idaho
Department of Water Resources	 2 - 178
* Not listed in Appendix E, Report to Congress
+ Title Page/Abstract/or Short Excerpt
i i

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
2.1.8	*Inspections-Case Studies:
Agricultural Drainage Wells in
Idaho	 2 - 196
2.2	Stormwater and Industrial Drainage
Wells (5D2, 5D4)	 2 - 364
2.2.1	Evaluation of Storm Water
Drainage (Class V) Wells, Muscle
Shoals Area, Alabama	 2 - 3 65
2.2.2	+Storm Water Drainage Wells in
the Karst Areas of Kentucky and
Tennessee	 2 - 402
2.2.3	+Study of the Effects of Storm
Water Injection by Class V Wells
on a Potable Ground Water System. 2 - 404
2.2.4	+Results of Dry Well Monitoring
Project for a Commercial Sice in
the Phoenix Urban Area	 2-406
2.2.5	A Case Study of Dry Well
Recharge	 2 - 408
2.2.6	Evaluation of Sump Impacts on
Ground Water in East Multnomah
County	 2 - 469
2.2.7	+The Impact of Stormwater Runoff
on Groundwater Quality and
Potential Mitigation	 2 - 524
2.3	Improved Sinkholes (5D3)	 2 - 526
2.3.1	*Notification of Threat to Under-
ground Source of Drinking Water.. 2 - 527
2.3.2	*From Assessment of Class V Wells
in the State of Virginia	 2 - 534
2.3.3	*Overview of Sinkhole Flooding:
Bowling Green, Kentucky	 2 - 540
* Not listed in Appendix E, Report to Congress
+ Title Page/Abstract/or Short Excerpt
iii

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
2.3.4 *Storm Water Drainage Wells in
the Karst Areas of Kentucky and
Tennessee	 2 - 553
2.4	Special Drainage Wells (5G30)	 2 - 568
2.4.1	*From Florida Underground
Injection Control Class V Well
Inventory and Assessment Report. 2 - 569
2.4.2	*From Inventory of Class V
Wells in the State of Montana... 2 - 586
SECTION 3	GEOTHERMAL WELLS	 3 - 1
3.1	Electric Power and Direct Heat
Reinjection Wells	 3-2
3.1.1	From Reporting on Class V
Injection Well Inventory and
Assessment in California	 3-3
3.1.2	*+Injection Well Procedures
Manual: A Case Study of the
Raft River Geothermal Project,
Idaho	 3 - 18
3.1.3	*Problems of Utilizing Ground
Water in the West Side Business
District of Portland, Oregon.... 3-28
3.1.4	*Low Temperature Geothermal
Resource Management	 3-83
3.2	Heat Pump/Air Conditioning Return
Flow Wells	 3 - 133
3.2.1	*Ground-Water Heat Pumps in
Pennsylvania	 3 - 134
3.2.2	*Ground-Water Heat Pumps in
the Tidewater Area of South-
eastern Virginia	 3 - 145
* Not listed in Appendix E, Report to Congress
+ Title Page/Abstract/or Short Excerpt
iv

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
3.2.3	*+Report to the Wisconsin
Legislature on Experimental
Groundwater Heat Pump Injection
Well Project	 3 - 180
3.2.4	*From Underground Injection
Operations in Texas: A
Classification and Assessment
of Underground Injection
Activities, Report 291	 3 - 186
3.2.5	Summary of Heat Pump/Air
Conditioning Return Flow Wells
From Various State Reports	 3 - 200
3.2.6	*1981 Inventory of the
Utilization of Water-Source
Heat Pumps in the Conterminous
United States	 3 - 209
3.2.7	*Understanding Heat Pumps,
Ground Water, and Wells -
Questions and Answers for the
Responsible Consumer	 3 - 251
3.3	Aquaculture Return Flow Wells
(5A8 )	 3 - 297
3.3.1 Draft Report of Investigation
Class V Injection Well
Inspections, Oahu and Hawaii
Islands, Hawaii	 3 - 298
SECTION 4	DOMESTIC WASTEWATER DISPOSAL WELLS	 4-1
4.1	Raw Sewage Waste Disposal Wells
and Cesspools (5W9, 5W10)	 4-2
4.1.1	From An Assessment of Class V
Underground Injection in
Illinois, Interim Report.
Phase One: Assessment of Current
Class V Activities in Illinois.. 4-3
* Not listed in Appendix E, Report to Congress
+ Title Page/Abstract/or Short Excerpt
v

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
4.1.2	Contamination of Underground
Water in the Bellevue Area	 4-9
4.1.3	Report of Investigations Class V
Well Inspections, Oahu and
Hawaii Islands, Hawaii	 4-36
4.2	Class V Septic Systems (5W11,
5W31, 5W3 2)	 4 - 7 0
4.2.1	Industry-Owned Septic Systems:
San Fernando Valley Basin	 4-71
4.3	Domestic Wastewater Treatment
Plant Effluent Disposal Wells
(5W12)	 4 - 100
4.3.1	*+Deep-Well Artificial Recharge
Experiments at Bay Park, Long
Island, New York (Geological
Survey Professional Papers
751-A through 751-F)	 4 - 101
4.3.2	Notification of Threat to Under-
ground Source of Drinking Water. 4 - 114
4.3.3	*"Assessment of Recharge Wells,"
Assessment of Class V Wells in
the State of Virginia	 4 - 121
4.3.4	*"Assessment of Recharge Wells,"
Underground Injection Operations
in Texas: A Classification and
Assessment of Underground Injec-
tion Activities, Report 291	 4 - 126
4.3.5	From Assessment of Class V
Injection Wells in the State of
Wyoming	 4 - 130
4.3.6	*"Waste-Water Injection:
Geochemical and Biochemical
Clogging Processes, "Ground
Water, vol. 23, No. 6	 4 -179
* Not listed in Appendix E, Report to Congress
+ Title Page/Abscract/or Short Excerpt
vi

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
SECTION"5	MINERAL AND FOSSIL FUEL RECOVERY
RELATED WELLS	 5-1
5.1	Mining, Sand, or Other Backfill
Wells (5X13)	 5 - 2
5.1.1	*Inspection of Slurry Injection
Procedures at the Old Darby
Mine Works (or Black Mountain
Mine)	 5 - 3
5.1.2	*Inventory and Assessment of the
Disposal of Coal Slurry and Mine
Drainage Precipitate Wastes
into Underground Mines in West
Virginia	 5-11
5.1.3	*In-Depth Investigation Program:
Acid Mine	 5 - 77
5.1.4	*From Underground Injection
Operations in Texas: A
Classification and Assessment of
Underground Injection Activities,
Report 291	 5-88
5.1.5	*From Missouri Underground
Injection Control Program Class V
Assessment	 5-96
5.1.6	*Backfill Monitoring Methods	 5 - 107
5.2	Solution Mining Wells (5X14)	 5 - 111
5.2.1	*Letter to Mr. Mark Bell of the
Colorado Department of Health,
Denver, Re Underground Injection
Control Permit Requirements	 5 - 112
5.2.2	*From Assessment of Class V
Injection Wells in the State of
Wyoming	 5 - 117
5.2.3	*"Chapter 7: In Situ Uranium
Leaching," Assessment of Class V
Injection Wells in the State of
Wyoming	 5-122
* Not listed in Appendix E, Report to Congress
+ Title Page/Abstract/or Short Excerpt
vii

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
5.2.4	From Report on Class V Injection
Well Inventory and Assessment
In Arizona	 5 - 214
5.3	In Situ Fossil Fuel Recovery
Wells (5X15)	 5 - 246
5.3.1	Organic Groundwater Contaminants
from Underground Coal
Gasification	 5 - 247
5.3.2	"Underground Coal Gasification
(Experimental Technology),"
Assessment of Class V Injection
Wells in the State of Wyoming.... 5 - 271
5.3.3	"Oil Shale In Situ Retorting
(Experimental Technology),"
Assessment of Class V Injection
Wells in the State of Wyoming.... 5 - 304
5.3.4	Rio Blanco Oil Shale Company,
MIS Retort	 5 - 329
5.3.5	MIS Retort Abandonment Program... 5 - 3 38
5.3.6	Groundwater Pollutants from
Underground Coal Gasification.... 5 - 344
5.4	Spent Brine Return Flow Wells
(5X16)	 5 - 352
5.4.1	From Final Design for Arkansas'
Class V Injection Well Inventory
and Assessment	 5 - 353
5.4.2	Memorandum to Wayne Thomas,
Technician for the Arkansas
Department of Pollution Control
and Ecology	 5 - 366
5.4.3	*+Development of a Two Aquifer
Contaminant Plume: A Case
History	 5 - 373
* Not listed in Appendix E, Report to Congress
+ Title Page/Abstract/or Short Excerpt
viii

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
SECTION 6	INDUSTRIAL, COMMERICAL, UTILITY WELLS... 6-1
6.1	Cooling Water Return Flow
Wells (5A19)	 6 - 2
6.1.1	*"Cooling Water Return Flow
Wells," Final Design for
Arkansas' Class V Injection
Well Inventory and
Assessment	 6-3
6.1.2	Summaries of Assessments of
Cooling Water Return Flow Wells
from Selected State Class V
Reports	 6-10
6.2	Industrial Process Water and Waste
Disposal Wells (5W20)	 6 - 19
6.2.1	Effluent Discharge Study,
Components, Inc., Kennebunk,
Ma ine			 6 - 20
6.2.2	Field Trip Report - Southern
Maine Finishing Company	 6-44
6.2.3	From Revised Interim Report:
Maine's UIC Program	 6-62
6.2.4	Initial Environmental Assessment,
Eastern Air Devices, Inc.
Facility, Dover, New Hampshire... 6-64
6.2.5	Inspection Report No. 3 From
Report on Inventory and
Assessment of Class V Injection
Wells in Puerto Rico	 6 - 112
6.2.6	Inspection Report No. 5 From
Report on Inventory and
Assessment of Class V Injection
Wells in Puerto Rico	 6 - 117
* Not listed in Appendix E, Report, to Congress
+ Title Page/Abstract/or Short Excerpt
ix

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
6.2.7	Inspection Report No. 10 From
Report on Inventory and
Assessment of Class V
Injection Wells in Puerto Rico... 6 - 123
6.2.8	Inspection Report No. 19 From
Report on Inventory and
Assessment of Class V Injection
Wells in Puerto Rico	 6 - 126
6.2.9	Inspection Report No. 23 From
Report on Inventory and
Assessment of Class V Injection
Wells in Puerto Rico	 6 - 130
6.2.10	New York Automobile Dealer
Inspection Trip Report	 6 - 132
6.2.11	Summary of New York State Dept.
of Environmental Conservation,
SPDES Permit Compliance System
Data, "Limits and Measurement
Data for Nassau and Suffolk
Facilities Which Discharge to
Groundwater"	 6 - 137
6.2.12	Assessment of Lehigh Portland
Cement Co., From State of
Maryland Class V Injection
Well Inventory and Assessment... 6 - 149
6.2.13	Assessment of Applied Electro-
Mechanics, Inc., From State of
Maryland Class V Injection
Well Inventory and Assessment... 6 - 153
6.2.14	Assessment of Hammermill Paper
Co., From Underground Injection
Control Program Class V Well
Assessment	 6 - 157
6.2.15	Assessment of Rodale (Square D)
From Underground Injection
Control Program Class V Well
Assessment	 6 - 162
* Not listed in Appendix E, Report to Congress
+ Title Page/Abstract/or Short Excerpt
x

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
6.2.16	Assessment of National Wood
Preservers, Inc., From
Underground Injection Control
Program Class V Well
Assessment	 6 - 164
6.2.17	Assessment of Highway Auto
Service Station (Butler Mine
Tunnel) From Underground
Injection Control Program
Class V Assessment	 6 - 168
6.2.18	Assessment of Franklin A.
Holland & Son, From Assessment
of Selected Class V Wells in
the State of Virginia	 6 - 171
6.2.19	"Reverse Osmosis Brine Wells,"
Florida Underground Injection
Control Class V Well Inventory
and Assessment Report	 6-176
6.2.20	Technical Evaluation for
American Cyanamid Company
Injection Well Nos. 1 and 2	 6 - 186
6.2.21	Industrial Disposal Well Case
Study: Unidynamics,
Phoenix, Inc	 6 - 225
6.2.22	Industrial Disposal Well Case
Study: Honeywell, Peoria Avenue
Facility	 6 - 257
6.2.23	Industrial Disposal Well Case
Study: Puregro-Bakersfield,
California	 6 - 281
6.2.24	Industrial Disposal Well Case
Study: Mefford Field, Tulare,
California	 6 - 299
6.2.25	Industrial Disposal Well Case
Study: Kearney, KPF - Stockton,
California	 6 - 328
* Not listed in Appendix E, Report to Congress
+ Title Page/Abstract/or Short Excerpt
xi

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
6.2.26	Industrial Disposal Well Case
Study: T.H.A.N. - Fresno,
California	 6 - 363
6.2.27	Refinery Waste Disposal Wells
From Reporting on Class V
Injection Well Inventory and
Assessment in California, Draft. 6 - 413
6.2.28	Tables From Reporting on Class
V Injection Well Inventory and
Assessment in California,
Draft	 6 - 450
6.3	Automobile Service Station Waste
Disposal Wells (5X28)	 6 - 463
6.3.1	*Subsurface Injection of
Service Bay Wastewater is a
Potential Threat to Groundwater
Quality	 6 - 464
SECTION 7	RECHARGE WELLS	 7-1
7.1	Aquifer Recharge Wells (5R21)	 7-2
7.1.1	"Class V Connector Wells,"
Florida Underground Injection
Control Class V Well Inventory
and Assessment Report	 7-3
7.1.2	"Assessment of Irrigation Dual
Purpose Wells," Underground
Injection Operations in
Texas: A Classification and
Assessment of Underground
Injection Activities,
Report 291	 7-25
7.1.3	National Artificial Recharge
Activity - Past and Present
Projects, Demonstrations,
Pilot Projects, Experiments,
and Studies	 7-31
Not listed in Appendix E, Report to Congress
+ Title Page/Abstract/or Short Excerpt
xn

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
7.2	Salt Water Intrusion Barrier
Wells (5B22)	 7 - 41
7.2.1	"Injection/Extraction Well
System - A Unique Seawater
Intrusion Barrier,:
Ground Water, Vol. 15, No. 1... 7 - 42
7.3	Subsidence Control Wells (5-523).. 7 - 63
7.3.1	"Case History No. 9.11,
Alabama, USA," Guidebook to
Studies of Land Subsidence
Due to Ground-Water
Withdrawal	 7-64
7.3.2	"Case History No. 9.12, The
Houston-Galveston Area, Texas,
USA, "Guidebook to Studies of
Land Subsidence Due to
Ground-Water Wichdrawal	 7-72
7.3.3	"Case History No. 9.13, San
Joaquin Valley, California,
USA, "Guidebook to Studies of
Land Subsidence Due to
Ground-Water Withdrawal"	 7-83
7.3.4	"Case History No. 9.14, Santa
Clara Valley, California, USA,
"Guidebook to Studies of Land
Subsidence Due to Ground-Water
Withdrawal	 7-99
SECTION 8	MISCELLANEOUS WELLS	 8-1
8.1	Radioactive Waste Disposal
Wells (5N24)	 8 - 2
8.1.1 Subsurface Disposal of Liquid
Low-Level Radioactive Waste
at Oak Ridge, Tennessee	 8-3
Not listed in Appendix E, Report to Congress
+ Title Page/Abstract/or Short Excerpt
xiii

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
8.1.2	*"Subclass 5N-Nuclear Waste
Disposal Wells, "Underground
Injection Control Class V
Inventory	 8 - 24
8.1.3	*"Low-Level Radioactive Waste
Disposal Well, "Idaho
Assessment of Class V Wells.... 8-28
8.1.4	From Disposal of Hanford
Defense High-Level, Transuranic
and Tank Wastes, Volume 3	 8 - 31
8.1.5	Report on Findings of NRC/EPA-
Underground Injection Liaison
Group: Radioactive Waste
Injection and In Situ Mining
of Uranium	 8 - 37
8.2	Experimental Technology
Wells (5X25)	T	 8 - 57
8.2.1	Aquifer Thermal Energy Storage
Experiments at the University
of Minnesota, St. Paul,
Minnesota, USA	 8-58
8.2.2	"Mound of Water Present Following
Air Injection Test," The Cross
Section, Vol. 31, No. 7	 8-64
8.3	Aquifer Remediation Related Wells
(5X26)	 8 - 68
8.3.1	From Oklahoma Class V Well Study
and Assessment	 8-69
8.3.2	From Inventory of Class V
Injection Wells in the State of
Colorado	 8-76
8.3.3	"Cleaning up Chemical Waste,"
Engineering News Record	 8-80
8.4	Abandoned Drinking Water/Waste
Disposal Wells (5X29)	 8-84
* Not listed in Appendix E, Report to Congress
+ Title Page/Abstract/or Short Excerpt
xiv

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
8.4.1	"Abandoned Wells," Inventory and
Assessment of Class V Injection
Wells in Minnesota	 8-85
8.4.2	Permanent Well and Test Hole
Abandonment	 8-98
8.4.3	From American Water Works
Association Standard for Deep
Wells, Section Al-13: Sealing
Abandoned Wells	 8 -108
xv

-------
Foreword
These references and documents were compiled by Engineering
Enterprises, Inc. from data gathered during preparation of Report
to Congress Class V Injection Wells: Current Inventory, Effects
on Groundwater, Technical Recommendations (EPA 57 0/09-87-006)
under EPA Contract No. 68-03-3416. The references are
representative of data gathered by the States, Territories, and
Possessions of the United States in fulfilling the regulatory
requirement of 40 CFR 146.52 (b). The EPA project manager was L.
Lawrence Graham, and the EEI project officer was Lorraine C.
Counc i1.
xv

-------
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to express their thanks to several
individuals and groups for their contributions to this report.
Contributing EPA Headquarters staff members included Mr. Lawrence
Graham and Ms. Rosemary Workman along with other staff members of
the Office of Drinking Water. We would also like to thank
individuals from the USEPA Regional offices including Tom Burns,
Region I; Leon Lazarus, Region II; Mark Nelson and Stu Kerzner,
Region III; John Isbell, Region IV; Gary Harmon, Region V;
Stephanie Johnson, Region VI; John Marre, Region VII; Paul
Osborne, Region VIII; Nathan Lau and Glenn Sakamoto, Region IX;
and Harold Scott, Region X. The EPA Class V Work Group is also
gratefully acknowledged.
All states who submitted information including final
reports, drafts reports, and inventory figures are greatly
appreciated. Several state contacts are also thanked for their
cooperation including John Poole, Alabama Department of
Environmental Management; Bob Krill, Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources; Stephen Burch and John Nealon, Illinois State
Water Survey; Michael Baker, Ohio EPA, Division of Water Quality
Monitoring and Assessments; William Klemt and Steve Musick along
with their associates, Texas Water Commission; Guy Cleveland,
Texas Railroad Commission; William Graham, Idaho Department of
Natural Resources; Charles "Kent" Ashbaker, Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality; and Burt Bowen, Washington Department of
Ecology.
xvi

-------
The following Engineering Enterprises, Inc. personnel
contributed to the report: Ms. Sheila Baber, Mr. Craig Bartlett,
Mr. Gary Cipriano, Ms. Lorraine Council, Mr. John Fryberger, Mr.
Hank Giclas, Mr. J. L. Gray, Ms. Denise Lant, Mr. Raj
Mahadevaiah, Ms. Mary Mercer, Mr. Michael Quillin, Mr. Philip
Roberts, Mr. Talib Syed, and Mr. Bill Whitsell. Special thanks
goes to the Engineering Enterprises Inc. support staff: Ms.
Raechel Bailey, Mr. Chuck Bishop, Ms. Donna Blaylock, Ms. Kara
Brown, Ms. Jolene Cradduck, Ms. Deborah Horsman, Ms. Kim Gant,
Ms. Cindy Jondahl, Ms. Sharron Moore, and Ms. Nancy Simpson.
Additional assistance was provided by Dr. Richard Tinlin, Mr.
Jeffrey Mahan, Dr. William Doucette, Mr. Jim Gibb, and Mr. Clark
Fulton of Geraghty and Miller, Inc. Dr. Gray Wilson and Dr.
Kenneth Schmidt, consultants to Engineering Enterprises, Inc.,
also contributed to this report.
xvii

-------
SECTION 3
Geothermal Wells
[3-1]

-------
Section 3.1
Electric Power and Direct Heat Reinjection Wells
Supporting Data
[3-2]

-------
SECTION 3.1.1
TITLE OF STUDY:
(or SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
AUTHOR:
(OR INVESTIGATOR)
DATE:
STUDY AREA(S):
NATURE OF BUSINESS:
BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES:
From Reporting on Class V
Injection Well Inventory and
Assessment in California
Engineering Enterprises, Inc.
May, 19 87
Moana - Steamboat Springs,
Nevada, USEPA Region IX
Not applicable
Wells in the Moana geothermal area
are considered to have a low
contamination potential. Wells in
this area return fluids to the
same geologic formation from which
they were withdrawn. In addition,
the natural leakage in the USDW
which occurs from the deeper, pri-
mary geothermal reservoir, is far
greater than potential leakage
resulting from increased hydraulic
head near injection wells.
the Steamboat Springs
believed to have a
to high contamination
Although the wells
into the geothermal
the reservoir is
be connected to the
overlying valley-fill aquifer
(USDW). Therefore, the spatial
pattern of withdrawals and
injections could have an unknown
effect on the mixing of thermal
and non-thermal waters.
Wells in
area are
moderate
potential.
inject back
reservoir,
believed to
[3-3]

-------
Geothermal Electric Power Reinjection and Direct Heat
Reinjection Wells (5A5/5A6) - Case Studies
Moana - Steamboat Hot Springs
These two geothermal areas are located in west-central
Nevada. The Moana area is in suburban Reno, and Steamboat Hot
Springs is about twelve miles to the south in unincorporated
Washoe County. Physiographically, this area is near the western
limit of the Great Basin. Both resource areas are within the
Truckee River Basin and subdividing that, within a hydrographic
area known as the Truckee Meadows shown in Figure V-13 (Denburgh
et. al. 1973). In 197 8 the population of the Truckee River Basin
was 177,000 of which the vast maj or't\i,y live in the Reno-Sparks
metropolitan area (Nevada, Division of Water Planning, Bulletin
No. 1^ 1980).
Two major orogenic events are responsible for the structural
and stratigraphic configuration in the area. The first episode,
beginning in the Late Mesozoic/ caused eugeosynclinal sedimentary
and volcanic rocks to be folded, faulted/ and regionally
metamorphosed to greenschist facies and continued with intrusion
of granitic plutons in the Cretaceous (Bonham, 196 9). The second
period of deformation began in the Tertiary and continues to the
present. Normal faulting, block tilting, wrench faulting and
folding associated with wrench faulting are features associated
with this deformation (Bonham, 1969). The current topography is
a result of the latest orogenic event and erosion.
1
[3-4]

-------
Peavine
Mountain
SPAR
>
/wARRB
Hil
RAN
n
/ Steamboat
, Hills
LEGEND
	Approximate Bedrock to Alluvium Contact
=> Shallow Groundwater How Direction
i	t-i
l	I Geothermal Resource Areas
• Public Water Supply Well
A Geothermal Injection Well
TRUCKEE MEADOWS BASE MAP
MOANA GEOTHERMAL AREA AND
STEAMBOAT HOT SPRINGS
609.012.06
Figure V-13
TT CI
r 3—5

-------
The Truckee Meadows is located in a valley between the
Carson Range to the west and the Virginia Range to the east.
Both ranges consist primarily of granitic rocks that intruded
older metavolcanic and metasedimentary rocks of which a few
isolated outcrops can be found (Bonham, 1969). Following a
period of erosion a thick sequence of Tertiary, volcanic flows
covered the region. Late Tertiary deposition also included
elastics and diatomite (Sandstone of Hunter Creek, Bingler,
1975). elastics deposition continued into the Quaternary in the
form of stream deposits, alluvial fan deposits, pediment gravels,
talus and slope ash (Bingler, 1975? Bonham, 1969). Figure V-14
is a schematic geologic cross section oriented approximately
east-west across Truckee Meadows illustrating the structure and
stratigraphy in the area.
The climate and water budget of the Truckee Meadows is
typical of other areas in the Great Basin Region (Todd, 19 83).
Precipitation is low in the valleys (avg. 7.6 inches/year at
Reno) but high (up to 40 inches/year) in the surrounding mountains
(Denburgh et. al. 1973). Recharge to groundwater reservoirs is
dominantly due to mountain front runoff which then seeps into
valley-fill sediments. Potential recharge from this source is
estimated to be 27,000 acre-feet/year (Denburgh et. al. 1973).
Total recharge may be up to 35,000 acre-feet/year taking seepage
losses from streams, basin underflow and infiltration into
account (Cohen and Loeltz, 1964). Groundwater discharge occurs
through municipal wells, domestic wells, springs,
evapotranspiration and baseflow to streams. Municipal usage of
3
[3-6]

-------
Elevation
8,000
6,000
4,000
A'
Qtb
Tk
TV
Tst
Tk
Tk
Staam
Boat
Craak
Qtg
Kgd
Qal
m
Qtg
Kgd
Kgd
Oal = Pleistocene to Recent, stream deposits, talus, slope
wash, alluvial fan and eolian deposits.
Qtg = Pleistocene to Recent, terrace, alluvial fan and pedi-
ment gravels, deeply weathered, highly dissected.
Qtb = Pliocene, basalt to andesite, flows and pyroclastics.
Tat = Pliocene, sedimentary rocks (the Sandstone of Hunter
Creek).
T* = Miocene-Pliocene, flows, flow breccia, tuff breccia,
mudflow breccia, agglomerate, volcanic conglomerate,
andesite to rhyodacite composition, Kate Peak Fm.
Kgd = Undifferential plutonic rocks, typically granodiorite.
(based on Bonham, 1969, plate 1 and Bingler, 1975)
SCHEMATIC GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION
OF THE TRUCKEE MEADOWS
e «¦»
BBlBENraNG
BBSS BMTERPfflSES.INC
609.012.06	Figure V-14
[3-71

-------
groundwater has increased from an average 656 acre-feet/year for
the thirty years prior to 1960 to 3,931 acre-feet/year from 1960-
69. Groundwater supplied 18% of the water used in the Reno-
Sparks municipal system during 1969 (Denburgh et. al. 1973).
Total groundwater pumpage in the Truckee Meadows during 1969 was
7,100 acre-feet (Denburgh et. al. 1973). Using data for 1975
Bedinger et. al. (1984) put groundwater withdrawal at 7,400 acre-
feet/year.
The principal aquifer in Truckee Meadows is unconsolidated
to semi-consolidated valley-fill. These sediments are grouped
into two units partly because of hydrologic properties (Denburgh
et. al., 1973). "Older alluvium" is mainly Pleistocene alluvial
fan deposits in the southern part of Truckee Meadows, especially
along valley margins, but becomes dominantly glacial outwash
close to the Truckee River (Bingler, 1975? Bonham, 1969). Older
alluvium is unconsolidated to consolidated, gravelly, muddy sand
and is locally deformed with dips of 10o-20o (Bingler, 1975;
Bonham, 1969). Thicknesses of up to 1,000 feet may occur in the
main Truckee River Valley (Bingler, 1975). Younger alluvium is
unconsolidated and consists of alluvial fan deposits, lacustrine
deposits and stream deposits. Maximum thickness of younger
alluvium is estimated to be 100' (Bingler 1975; Denburgh et. al.,
1973).
Estimated transmissivity of the valley-fill aquifer from
municipal wells ranges from 210 m2/day (16,000 gpd/ft) to 745
m2/day (60,000 gpd/ft) using specific capacity data and the
5
[3-8]

-------
method of Walton (1962). Table V-5 contains well construction
data used to estimate aquifer transmissivity which is also shown.
A few domestic wells are completed in rocks of volcanic origin in
the Truckee Meadows. Estimated transmissivity of these units is
in the 1-40 m2/day (100-3200 gpd/ft) range. Yields from these
units indicate they would not be a target for development of
municipal water supplies. The groundwater flow direction is to
the north and east in the Truckee Meadows (Bedinger et. al..
1984).
Water quality is generally very good in the valley-fill
aquifer. Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) is in the 200-700 mg/1
range for most wells (Denburgh et. al., 1973). Weathering of
hydrothermally altered rock around the margins of Truckee Meadows
is believed responsible for more highly mineralized groundwater
in close proximity to those areas (Denburgh et. al., 1973).
Arsenic and fluoride concentrations in groundwater near the
geothermal resource areas of Moana and Steamboat Hot Springs
exceed National Primary Drinking Water Standards (Flynn and
Ghusn, 1984 ; Bateman and Scheiback, 197 5? Denburgh et. al.,
1973).
In the Moana geothermal resource area spent geothermal
fluids are being reinjected to the formation they are produced
from, the Kate Peak Andesite. Injection zones are 739' - 1436'
below ground level. The injection zone has a TDS concentration
of about 1000 mg/1 (Flynn and Ghusn, 19 84; Bateman and Scheiback,
1975) .
[3-9]

-------
T	\
TRANSMISSIVITY DATA FOR SELECTED MUNICIPAL AND
INDUSTRIAL WELLS IN TOE TRUCKEE MEADOWS
Location^-
T/R, Sec.
Depth
(m)
Thickness
(m)
Diameter
(m)
Duration
of Pumping
Spec. Cap.
(gpm/ft)
T3
m2/day
T3
(gpd/ft)
18/20,
6
87.2
39.6
.30
48
hrs.
14
286
23,000
18/20,
27
57.3
24.0
.30
16
hrs.
17
360
29,000
19/19,
12
179
113
.30
48
hrs.
33
745
60,000
19/20,
4
202
65.6
.30
48
hrs.
25
621
50,000
19/20,
6
162
82. 3
(est.)
.30
48
hrs.
47
1, 100
89,0004
19/20,
8
83. 5
39.6
.46
48
hrs.
24
600
48,300
19/20,
17
81.1
?
.30
48
hrs.
20
497
40,000
19/20,
18
209
58
.30
48
hrs.
8
210
16,900
19/20,
30
252
201
(est. )
.30
48
hrs.
18
435
35,000
(from data in Denburgh et. al. , 1973)
1	- Township/Range, Section
2	- Producing zone thickness from perforation or screened intervals, less accurate thickness resul
when only gross producing intervals were reported.
3	- T = transmissivity
4	- Production zone appears to be the Sandstone of Hunter Creek.
0
1
o

-------
The injection zone at Steamboat Hot Springs is about 400' to
500' below ground level into a volcanic tuff which is also the
production zone. TDS of the injection zone is in the 2000-3000
mg/1 range (Bateman and Scheiback, 197 5).
Available information suggests USDW's are present down to at
least 1000' below ground level in most of the Truckee Meadows.
Quaternary valley-fill and Tertiary valley-fill (the Sandstone of
Hunter Creek) may be up to 4000' thick near the center of Truckee
Meadows (Bingler, 1975; Denburgh et. al., 1973). However, water
quality at those depths is unknown.
Fault zones appear to be a limiting factor in the isolation
of the injection zone from other USDW's. Production and
injection zones at both resource areas are located in or near
faults. These faults have no doubt contributed to the overall
transmissivity of the rock units present by producing fracture
permeability. Evidence of this connection comes from geochemical
and water temperature data which indicate there is a natural
discharge of geothermal fluids into the Tertiary and Quaternary
valley-fill aquifers (Flynn and Ghusn, 1984; Bateman and
Scheiback, 1975). Water more mineralized and warmer than
expected is detectable for about one mile away from presumed
geothermal source areas (Bateman and Scheiback, 1975; Flynn
and Ghusn, 19 84).
[3-111

-------
SUMMARY OF CONTAMINATION POTENTIAL
Moana Geothermal System
This geothermal resource area in Reno, Nevada, currently
has two multi-home geothermal space heating operations which
utilize injection wells. These are Sierra Geothermal and Warren
Estates. Both operations have been assessed as having low
contamination potential. Major factors leading to this
assessment are (1) both operations use closed loop systems and
return the heat spent geothermal fluid to the same geologic
formation it was withdrawn from and (2) while data on parameters
of the Primary Drinking Water Standards are lacking, overall
injectate chemistry is not drastically different from non-thermal
waters in the valley-fill aquifer. The following paragraphs
elaborate further on these points plus some remarks on mechanical
integrity of the injection wells.
These wells are considered by the investigators to have been
mechanically sound when operations began and ongoing operational
monitoring is considered sufficient. However, the MIT
requirements could be improved. The wells were constructed with
a cement filled annular space between the well casing and
geologic formations. This cemented interval extends from the top
of the injection zone to ground level. Casing integrity was also
tested at the time of construction by twenty-four hour pressure
fall-off tests. Continued operational monitoring consists of
daily checks on the dynamic fluid levels in the wells. At Warren
9
[3-12]

-------
Estates these levels are being continuously recorded.
Recommendations for upgrading mechanical integrity testing are
made in Section VII.
Injection zone water quality will essentially be unaffected
by these injection operations. This determination is made based
on the fact that heat spent geothermal fluids are being returned
to the same formation from which they were withdrawn. Another
factor minimizing changes to the geothermal fluid chemistry is
that both space heating systems are the closed loop type. As
such there are no concentrating effects due to evaporation and
other pH, Eh changes due to a loss of volatiles or exposure to
oxygen in the atmosphere are largely avoided. This type of
system should have less problems with precipitation of solids or
scale formation, causing well or formation plugging, than an open
system.
The last point in addressing the contamination potential
deals with the effects of mixing injectate and waters of other
USDW's. In this case the only other USDW besides the geothermal
reservoir which has been identified is the "valley-fill aquifer".
Mixing might occur due to a loss of mechanical integrity in the
injection wells or by natural interconnection of the injection
zone and USDW's. As described in the hydrogeology section faults
or fractures are numerous in the Moana area and thermal waters
occur at shallow depths. This indicates natural discharge from a
deeper primary geothermal reservoir, the Kate Peak Andesite, into
the valley-fill aquifer. A fine grained confining layer above
10
[3-13]

-------
the Kate Peak Andesite, the Sandstone of Hunter Creek, is absent
in some areas. Direct leakage across formation boundaries can
occur in those areas. This natural leakage has diminished water
quality in the valley-fill aquifer at a few municipal wells
bordering the Moana area (Bateman and Scheiback, 1975).
Diminished water quality occurs primarily in terms of arsenic,
fluoride, and TDS concentrations.
Effects of increased leakage due to greater hydraulic head
around injection wells causing upward movement of thermal waters
along nearby faults or fractures would be minimal. The same is
true for mixing due to a loss of mechanical integrity in these
two wells. It is true that some local degradation of water
quality in the valley-fill aquifer might occur but due to the
similar chemistry of thermal and non-thermal waters here it would
take approximately a 50-50 mixture to raise parameters like
arsenic, fluoride or TDS above Drinking Water Standards. Also,
such leakage may not be a short cut for geothermal fluids to mix
with valley-fill aquifer water near the municipal water wells.
Transmissivity, hydraulic gradients and flow path length may make
the Kate Peak Andesite a more direct path to the valley-fill
aquifer near the municipal wells. Lastly, municipal water
supplies are not threatened by these operations because
potentially impacted wells are only a fraction of the total water
supply wells and the water utility company blends well water with
better quality Truckee River water.
11
[3-14]

-------
Steamboat Hot Springs
Geothermal Development Associates has constructed an
electric power generating facility with two injection wells.
This facility has only recently been completed and is in an
equipment testing mode. Anticipated start up is December, 1986.
This should be considered a preliminary assessment because this
is new inventory information and some pertinent details of well
construction, mechanical integrity testing and operational
monitoring have not been collected. Hydrogeology and water use
information indicates there are domestic and public water supply
wells within about 1 mile of these injection wells. Updated
information on public water supply wells in the Steamboat
vicinity has been requested and should be included in a final
assessment. Based on information presently available the use of
these injection wells is believed to have a moderate to high
contamination potential. Three major factors lead to this
assessment: (1) the injection zone is the geothermal reservoir,
(2)	the facility utilizes a closed loop geothermal system, and
(3)	injection occurs in close proximity (400-900') to the
production area but there is a direct hydraulic connection to a
valley fill aquifer. These points are discussed in the following
paragraphs.
The two injection wells will be disposing of heat spent
geothermal fluids into the andesite, tuff-breccia at depths of
400 to 600' below ground level. This corresponds closely with
the zone in which production wells are completed. Background
water quality in this zone around the site should be homogeneous.
12
[3-15]

-------
Impacts to water quality in this zone should therefore be
minimal.
The fact that this facility uses a binary method of electric
power generation also minimizes impacts to water quality of the
injection zone and othe USDW's. The geothermal fluids are
totally contained in a closed loop at this facility which
minimizes chemical changes to the waste stream. One aspect of
this is that there are no concentrating effects due to
evaporation or flashing. Also, pH and Eh changes due to a loss
of volatiles or exposure to oxygen in the atmosphere are largely
avoided. A closed loop system should therefore have less prblems
with well or formation plugging due to precipation of solids or
scale formation.
The third point is important because the injection zone is
probably in direct hydraulic connection with the other USDW in
the area. The valley-fill aquifer, units Qal and Qtg on Figure
V-14, is the only identifiable USDW present besides the
geothermal reservoir. The valley-fill aquifer is believed to be
connected to the geothermal reservoir near Steamboat Hot Springs
because in some areas it was deposited directly on the andesite,
tuff-breccia. When there are intervening rock units, faults and
fractures are conduits connecting the two. The spatial pattern
of geothermal fluid withdrawals and injection could therefore
have an unknown effect on the pattern of mixing between thermal
and non-thermal waters. Some increased mixing of waters may
occur to the north and northeast of the injection wells. This
13
[3-16]

-------
could be detrimental to valley-fill aquifer water in terms of
TDS, Arsenic, Boron and temperature.
14
[3-1

-------
SECTION 3.1.2
TITLE OF STUDY:
(or SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
AUTHOR:
(or INVESTIGATOR)
DATE:
FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION:
NATURE OF BUSINESS:
BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES:
Injection Well Procedures Manual:
A Case Study of the Raft River
Geothermal Project, Idaho
David Kraus, Gregory Burgdorf,
William Zamor
December, 1983
Raft River Geothermal Project,
Idaho, USEPA Region X
Not applicable
SMC Martin was requested to
prepare an injeccion well
procedures manual to provide EPA
Region X with assistance in the
evaluation of injection well
permit applications. The manual
discusses a real-world example of
an injection well located in a
complex hydrogeologic setting and
is written for a technical
audience familiar with the UIC
program. Due to the manual's
length, only the introduction is
included here.
[3-18]

-------
EPA Contract No. 68-01-6288	««
January 1984	! SMC McZTtlll
900 West Vailey Forge Read
PO Box 859
Vadev rorce, ^ennsvivarua i9J8^
INJECTION WELL PROCEDURES MANUAL:
A CASE STUDY OF THE RAFT RIVER
GEOTHERMAL PROJECT, IDAHO


Office of Drinking Water
Ground Water Protection Branch
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, DC 20460
13-191

-------
December 19 83
INJECTION WELL PROCEDURES
MANUAL: A CASE STUDY OF THE
r\f: river	project, tdaho
by
David L. Xraus
Gregory J. Burgdorf
William Zamor
SMC Martin Inc.
900 West Valley Forge Road
P. 0. Box 8 59
Valley Forge, PA 19482
EPA Contract #6 8-01-628 8
Task #8
Project Officer
Mario Salazar
Task Officers
Joseph F. Keely
Harold M. Scott
[3-20]

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. INTRODUCTION	1
Background	1
Purpose and Scope	1
Use of Manual	2
II. PROJECT HISTCY	4
III. PHYSICAL SETTING	11
Geography	11
Review Comments	13
Geology	15
General	IS
Stratigraphy	15
Hydrogeology	18
Geological Structure	20
Review Comments	24
IV. WELL CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION TECHNIQUES	31
Drilling and Construction Summary of
Well RRGI-6	31
Drilling and Construction Summary of
Well RRGI-7	34
Review Comments	38
V. WELL LOGGING AND TESTING	4 2
Borehole Geophysical Analysis	42
Introduction	42
The Logging Program	42
Induction Log	43
S? Curve	44
Acoustic, Density, Neutron Logs	45
Other Borehole Tools/Miscel-
laneous Indicators for
Fracture Detection	47
Injection Zone Testing	47
pump and Injection Tests	47
Review Comments	54
First Case	54
Well RflGI-7	56
VI. AREA OF REVIEW CALCULATIONS	58
Potential Injection Formulation	58
Review Comments	62
VII. GEOTHERMAL FLUID CHARACTERISTICS AND
COMPATIBILITY TESTS	65
Water Chemistry	65
[3-211

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Continued)
Page
Water Compatibility Test	67
Filter Studies	71
Review Comments	73
III. ^ONTTORI.JG I/ELL PROGRAM	77
General Grounu-.vater Tr-d:ius ana Test
Responses	77
Individual Monitoring Well Responses	79
Review Comments	82
IX. SUMMARY	3 5
REFERENCES
APPENDIX A: Conversion Factors
APPENDIX B: Permit Application Checklists
[3-2;

-------
1
2
3
4
5.
5:
6
7
3
9
10
11
12
13
LIST OF FIGURES
Paae
Raft River Well Field Location
(from Dolenc et al, 1981).
5
Location and Construction Features of
Raft River Well System (from
Dole".: e 1 al , L981 ) .
9
Raft River Valley and Major Structural
Features Adjoining the Valley (from
Dolenc et al, 1981).
16
Water Level Contours in the Raft River
Valley (from Walker et al, 1970).	19
An Early Interpretation of the Bridge
Fault Zone (from Dolenc et al, 1981).	22
A Later Interpretation of the Bridge
Fault Zone (from Dolenc et al, 1981).	22
Site Suitability for Deep Hell Injection
(from Reeder et al, 1977).	25
Seismic Risk Areas of the Onited States
(from Algermisen, 1969).	29
Well Construction of RRGI-6 (from Miller
and Prestwich, 1979a).	33
Well Construction of RRGI-7 (from Miller
and Prestwich, 1979b).	37
Bulk Density-Porosity Plot from
Schlumberger Modified to Show Raft
River Rock Types (from
Dolenc, et al 1981).	46
Pressure Buildup During Injection Test of
Well RRGI-6 (from Dolenc et al, 1981).	50
Pressure Buildup During Injection Test
of Well RRGI-7 (from Dolenc et al, 1981). 51
Plot of Pressure Buildup Data from an
Injection Test of the Mt. Simon Formation
in Ohio (from Everett, 1980).	55
[3-23]

-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table	Page
1	Logs Run on RRGI-6 (from
Dolenc et al, 1981).	32
2	Logs Run on RRGI-7 (from
Dolenc et al, 1981).	35
3	Summary of Well RRGI-o Parameters
(from Dolenc et al, 1981).	52
4	Summary of Well RRGI-7 Parameters
(from Dolenc et al, 1981).	53
5	Predicted Pressure Response (kPa) at the
end of 1 Year (t ) and 3 Years (t ) of
Operation, at 8 5* Osage, in Each well
(from Dolenc et al, 1981).	59
6	Selected Physical and Chemical Data from
the Raft River Project Wells (from
Dolenc et al, 1981).	66
7	Water Compatibility for Geothermal
Wells RRGE-1, RKGE-2, RRGE-3, RRGP-5
and RRGI-6 (from Dolenc et al, 1981).	69
8	Monitoring Well Summary
(from Dolenc et al, 1981).	78
[3-24]

-------
I. INTRODUCTION
Background
The Safe Dcmking Water Act (SDWA) was adopted in 1974
in an effort to correct deficiencies of the Clean Water Act
of L972. The SD'.iA incorporated auverjl prevail 3-13
specifically to ground-water protection.
Among these provisions is the requirement that the CJ.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) develop minimum require-
ments for state programs regarding the protection of underground
sources of drinking water (USDWs] from pollution by subsurface
fluid infection. The SDWA also requires that EPA adopt and
administer an Underground Injection Control (UIC) program in
states failing to meet those requirements or in those states
that decline primacy with regards to a QIC program. In
administering the UIC program, the responsibilities of each
EPA regional office will include reviewing permit applications
for injection facilities.
Purpose and Scope
Under EPA Contract $68-01-628 3, Task #8, SMC Martin was
requested to prepare an injection well procedures manual
which would provide EPA Region I with assistance in the
evaluation of injection well permit applications. The
manual discusses a real world example of an injection well
located in a complex hydrogeologic setting and is written
for an audience familiar with injection well technology,
1
[3-25]

-------
hydrogeology and the Underground Infection Control Program
(UIC). The case study was to be used as an aid to the
Regional staff to review, condition and approve or disapprove
a permit application.
selected case study describes operations at the
Raft River Geothermal Field, Idaho. The case study includes
detailed discussion and analysis on the site geology and
hydrogeology, disposal well siting, construction and comple-
tion techniques, geophysical and mechanical integrity testing,
area of review calculations, wastewater characteristics and
compatibility tests, and design of the monitoring well
network. These topics were chosen on their importance in
the siting and permitting of an injection facility under the
UIC program, and the availability of information to develop
suitable evaluations of the infection well system.
Use of Manual
The case study presented in this manual is the Raft
River Geothermal Project, Idaho operated by U.S. Department
of Energy. The technical investigations were prepared and
reported by EG&G, Idaho. In the preparation of this case
study, information was extracted from several published EG&G
reports. This case study was not intended to represent a
precise summary of all facets of the Raft River operation,
but only to present selected data relevant to a permit
reviewer.
2
[3-25]

-------
The case study is written in an instructional format.
Although the case study wells are Class V geothermal injection
welLs, the requirements of the UIC program for all five
classes of injection wells and additional geologic and
engineering factors are discussed. At the conclusion of a
section or cnapcer, critical topics -rfnicn snould be considered
in the approval or disapproval of a permit application are
noted. A discussion is then presented for each topic considering
basic geologic rationale and the OIC program requirements.
In addition, the reader is given technical questions to
answer or evaluate in several chapters.
Figures in this manual were taken directly from several
publications and contain metric and/or English units. Unit
conversion procedures were not attempted on the manual1s
figures. The permit writer must be know ledge able of both
unit systems since permit applications may contain either
unit system. Conversion factors are given in Appendix A to
aid the permit writer.
3
[3-27]

-------
SECTION 3.1.3
TITLE OF STUDY:
(or SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
Problems of Utilizing Ground Water
in the West-Side Business District
of Portland, Oregon
AUTHOR:
(or INVESTIGATOR)
DATE:
STUDY AREA:
S.G. Brown
1963
Portland, Oregon
USEPA Region X
NATURE OF BUSINESS:
Not applicable
BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES:	The purposes of this study are to
present available data on the
occurrence and use of groundwater
in the Portland area, to point out
problems, and to suggest areas for
additional studies. A portion of
the study examines recharge wells
used for heating and/or cooling
(heat pump wells) and identifies
temperature changes resulting from
increased use of these systems as
a potential problem.
[3-28]

-------
Problems of Utilizing
Ground Water in the
West-Side Business District
of Portland, Oregon
3, S. G. 3R0U7I	^C_ ^12) ¦
CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE HYDROLOGY OF THE UNITED STATES
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1619-0
Prspared in cooperation with
the Oregon State Engineer

UNITED STATSS GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON 1963
[3-29]

-------
VSITZD STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
STEWART L. L'DALL, Secretary
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
TSnmi» 3. Nolaa, Director
For ala tr tti ;
i Pttsdsi Ottca
[3-30]

-------
CONTENTS
Pw
Abstract...								....			01
Introduction									1
Purpoee and scope of '.be investigation......	.			.........	1
Acknowledgments				2
Location and extent of the area...	..................	2
CUmate							3
^V»U-autaber.ne rvsteci					3
C-arac'.*.* icJ T.i_oc :: •;* -oci 							^
Occurrence of ground-»ater	...						8
General features of oeeurrrenca				8
Water*beano{ character of Lie rocx units............	.......	9
Ground -water in the Older sedimentary rocks		9
Ground Tater in the Columbia River basalt..	....					9
Ground alter in the Sandy River mudatone		10
Ground Taier m the Tfoutdaie formation.............	....	10
The withdrawal of ground water		II
Withdrawal from the Troutdale formation		...			13
Withdrawal frotn the Columbia River baaait		N
Factors induenca? withdrawal					.......		M
Artificial rec&ai^e... .					14
Ground-water ieveb m che uri				16
Temperature of the ground water	...	.....			19
Chetmcal quality of the ground water..						23
Summary of problems		23
Additional studies needed........™............			24
Reference*!		29
ILLUSTRATIONS
fPlatmima pocutJ
PiATX 1. Geologic aao of a par; of Portland. Ore;., showing the location
of representative weik.
Z. Graphs showuj? water !ev«u ji w*U IN/1-34X1, aetered pmnpage,
monthly average ftaqe of the Willamette River, monthly preapj.
tnH cumulative departure from average monthly precpita.
Uoa at Portland.
ho
Fiacax 1. Mean monthly temperature and avenge monthly precipitation
in downtown Portland, Oreg.....	................—. OS
1 Map showing the altitude of tha upper nrfaes at tha Cilnmlm
3irer baaait			——..——- 4
3.	OU^rammauc section through a discharging waux^tabia
w«U__.................. .......... 12
4.	Relationship of monthly metered pumpajya lo tha monthly
mean atnperaiura...^..............—............... IS
m
[3-31]

-------
coirrarrs
TABLES
phi
T.»ntc 1. Ttccarda of rcprcscntnlive wells in the »«t-aidc bu6ioea
district of Portland, Orr%		 0-3
2.	Dnllcn' lop of representative wells			 --
3.	MonUii* aactcred pumpo«e for lienung and cooiin^, in sere-
feet, discharged to the aty of Portland icw-crs from welb in
the west-side business district..............	.........
4.	Chemical waiyaes of «ster from wells of the wcat-wdc business
iatnet, Portland. Ora;					 -t-
[3-32]

-------
CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE HYDROLOGY OF THE UNITED STATES
PROBLEMS OF UTILIZING GROUND WATER IN THE
WEST-SIDE BUSINESS DISTRICT OF PORTLAND, OREGON
h
abstract
The withdrawal of ground water for industrial uses and for '.he heaung and
cooling of buildings u '.he vest-side business datnct of Portiane has nersaaed
greatlv since 19jo. Ad s result of this increased withdrawal. groundwater levels
apparently are dediaicg progressive!'.*, even though some of :>.e nater -nthdrawi
ls returned to the ground-water oodics by mcirj of artificial recharge. Temcera-
ture and chemical quality of the ground water also are chancing at places, due to
the increased pumping and the practice of aruhaal recaorgtag with *ater of
different tetroerature and che=ical eocioosition from the natural ground waters
The west-aide business district a uncertain. :a dowawa.-d succession, bv silu\ turn
of Recent age, Suv.oiaeustnne deposits of Late Pleistocene igt. '.he Troutdale
formation of eariv Pliocene sw, the Sandr River mudstone. of earivf'*
Pliocene ace. the Columcia P-'-er basalt of Miocene and Pliocene;", i^c. anc
manse sedimentary roots of early Tertiary age. Sana acd gravel Lavers in t.ie
Troutdaie formation and interiow -ones in the Columbia Ri\er basalt are water
bearing and yield water of good to fair chemical quality to several dozen industrial
wells m the area. The underlying marine jedimeaurr racks contain saline water,
which apparent!? is migrating upward and muang with water in the basalt
aquifers.
The data presently available indicate that with continued uncoordinated in-
creases in pumoed withdrawal and artificial reehar^e '.he proolems of cecuning
levels and caanges in the temoerature and chemical quality of the ground water
prooaolv will increase. \ comorehensive olin for the deveioomeat and manage-
ment of the ground-water resources is neeced to insure ^mnuc benefits from
the ground water ana to	the -ifects of the proolema now developing.
Additional m/ormaCon on the changes m temperature, chemical qual.tr, and
levels of the ground water, and on the amounts of ground water pumped and re-
charged artificially is seeded to serve is a basis for such a comprehensive plan.
INTRODUCTION
PTT2P08Z &2TD SCOPS OP TH2 OTESTtOATIOIJ
The withdrawal of ground water for industrial uses and for the
heating and cooling of buildings in downtown Portland has increased
greatly since 195a. Aa & result of this increased withdrawal,
ground-water levels apparently are declining progressively, even
[3-33]

-------
02 CONTRIBUTIONS TO TllZ IIVauOLOCV OF TltE CNITZD STATES
-though some of the water wuhdriwn i-> rruirne'l id ihe <;ruiiii«i-w uier
bodies by menus of uruiic:ui re :mr^'1 The ¦ iciriu-ter of wmrr wnii-
ilrnvn from some «eil.\ ii i	'ituicr-iiir.- In view uf ihr* t-\--
peeied ::ierr«tor in t:tc i 'nr :ii. niter in the ju«:uo«"
district. it. is !iiiucmu.Li'Q Ui.it » r:ou> .ntcrerctice	\\ciis vm11
occur, and thm the suitability of uic ground water for some uses may
be unpaired, uniess more orticrly procedures are followed in the with-
drawal anu rccuargr: of die g-ound wiuer. and 111 devcloomcm of
auiui.jr .. _'"o ._d-- " v."1" -i
The purpose oi tuis stuuy ^ to consoi.uatc ina prc=c-.w
geologic and hydroiogtc information bearing 011 the occurrence and
use of ground water in the area, to point oul the developing and antic-
ipated problems, and to suggest, additional studies thai arc needed to
form a basis for eG":t.:ent tajiumatration and development of the
ground-water resources.
Serorai classes of data arc pmV 7. MoQacaa acd Mr R. A. C-i.-iioc. engineers of i^e city
of Portland, made araiisale data on metereu water uisc^:ur?a from
wells to city sewers. The A. M. Jannscr. Driiiag Co . 0 E. Jannsen
Drilling Co, Steinman 3ros.. R. J Strasser Dniling Co., and Mr.
Lance Strsyer coatnbuten weil logs and other information. The
assistance of all is gratefully acknowledged.
LOCATION AST) sxrsrr OF T22 AJtSA
The area of this study is the main business and industrial district
oa the -vest aide of the Willamette River :n the city of Portland
(pi. 1). The area e.itends from the river across a narrov flood plain,
stream-omit terraces, and ailuriaJ slooes, to the foot of the West
Hills (part of the Tualatin Mountains), and along the Willamette

-------
CROU.VD WATER. PORTLAND, orec.
03
Iliver liownatrcmn from the virirmy of dm Ross Liand Bridge 10
ubout ! mile uortii'vcst of the Bromiuuy Bnage. The area is roughly
ovaisiiapcd. about 3 miles long, 1V, miles in ma-vimum width, ami
tonus slightly moie than Z iquurc miies Most, of the area is bmi:
up m multiriie-siory commercial, warehouse. noicl, apartment, aaa
oiFilc buiidings
CLLXAT3
Portland lias a tcmocrate. moist, marine-type climate (hat is
rt'Oi::'.c" 30"i'»' i: c" _;	j ¦ , ' Co'is-	.1,3
00'. - or. '.-e c::y acc ".ue ?.ic:.ic Occm. The areata largely sheltered
from tlic more extreme conr mental climate of eastern Orrgoa ana
eastern Washington by the Cascade Range to tlie east.
Climatological data care been rccoraca by the U S Wcattier Bureau
at Portland since 1S7I. Tlie mean monthly temperature aad average
monthly prccioitauon computed from those records arc shown :n
flgrire L. The mean annual tcmoeraturc recorded at tlie Portland
Wcatber Bureau Station is 54.5°F "Tlie hiipest temperature re-
corded was I07°F in July 1042, and the lowest was 3"F in December
1919.
The average ancuai precipitation at Portland was 39.01 incscs
for the SS-year period ending :n 195S; less than one-tenth of the total
fell as snow Average T.or.tily prcc.auat.on ranged from 7 1 mcccs
10 Decernocr 10 0.4 mcs ia July
The relative humidity at Portland generally averages S5 to 05
percent in the early mornings. The relative humidity in tie after-
noons remains about 70 percent from November through February,
but is as low as 47 percent during the summer. No evaporation
daia arc available from the Portland station.
^SIi-irCT43ZSDTO STSTm
Weils discussed :n this reoor: are designated by symbols mat
indicate their location according :o the Federal rectangular system
of land division. In the symbol 1N/1-34N1, for example, the part
preceding the hyphen indicates respectively the township aad range
(T. 1 N , R. I E.) north and east of the Willamette base line and merrii.m
Because most of the State Lies scuta of the Willamette base lint and
ease of the Willamette meridian, the letters indicating the directions
south and east are omitted, but the letters W and N" are included for
wells lying west of the meridian and north of tbo base line. The
fins number after the hyphen Indicates tlie section (sec. 34), and the
letter (N) indicates a 40-acro subdivision of die section as shown in
the accompanying diagram. The final digit is the serial number
of the weil -within that 40-acre tract. Thus, well 1X/1-34X1 is in
[3-35]

-------
04 CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE HYDROLOGY OF THE UNITED STATES
SW;',SW;,' sec. 34, T. 1 N., It. 1 E., and is the Srst well in the tract
io be listed.
1
1 0
c
3
i
A i
i E
i
¦
5 1
r1 i
1
' M I L I K | J
N
CH-L3.AC7ZP. JL.ND 3LELATI0JT OF T22 30C2 TOIT3
The Columbia River oasaii. of Miocene aid Plioccnet") age. n
the oldest rock unit exposeu ia the '•''est Portland area. This for-
mation (jomor.SK an accordantly layered serses of lava Sows and a
few scattered interflow beds of '.tin.
The oasalt is exposed at piaccs in the Wes: HI2s, w-cre :he basalt
and underlying rocks have been upfoiced in on anticline. The
UDDer surface of the basalt slopes cisc.ra.-d about COO feet per mjie
and piiijcs bcr.cat.i younger sedimentary roct-^ near liic foot of the
West Iliiis. At a well in the victmty of X.Z. CDth Avenue and Glisan
Street, about 2 miles east of the Steel 3ndge, the top of the basalt
is believed to be 1,100 feet below sea level. The eastward inclination
of the basalt is show a :n the cross section in plate 1, and by contours
on the upper sun ace of the basalt in figure 2.
Where unwcathercd. the basalt is mostly dense, hard, and dark
gray to black. Beneath most of the West Hills, the upper port of
the biufidt has weathered to a red clayey sod to deaths of 20 feet or
more '.Trimble, 1957' Along me steeo eastern siooe of the West
Hills, w here erosion is more active, ".he oasai: ts relatively unweathered.
Individual layers of the basalt rang® m thicitness from 5 to about
100 feet and average about oO feet. The layere commonly consist
of a dense central par:, moderately jointed as a result of contraction
during cooling; a vesicular upper part, x at ch commonly is more broken
as a result of weathering and jointing; and a lower part that commonly
is strongly jointed and sometimes mbbly.
Records of wells in the area suggest that the Columbia Itivcr basalt
is at least 700 to 300 feet thics in the west Portland area. Shale
anil sand of Tcruary age underlie the basalt and have been reached
[3-36]

-------
caouxa WaTSR, PORTLAND, OREC.
05
'ann« jenoj i47t~i^30
"5VJ ,1
5 I
5 40 1—
<
X
20
3 —
V«4n on«wOf
'f^o^otwe 5^ 5*
/
1
7 —
6 U
A««fogt annuel
artooiionon, J3.9 53
Fterme 1 — Mru soaiair lapmnt tad tnmi oouair pnowtoaoa ia downtown Pwtiaad. Of**.
(tram CJ. Wemtaw Surcaa aw*).
by dnilir.g at Gladstone, about 0 miles southeast of tins area, at a
depth of G85 feet (615 ft beiow sea level), and in three veils m the
West Hills. Of tha tires veils La West Hills, tiro are La sec. 23,
T. 1 N.t R. I W., where the basalt is about 700 feet thick, and tha top
of the older sedimentary material is about 200 feet abovo sea level.
The third well is at the Rivenide Cemetery, in see. 27, T. 1 S., It. 1 £.,
where the underlying sedimentary rocks ora TOO feet below the murines
(250 ft below sea level).
Unconfurmably ovcriring the basalt is a senes of consolidated
and partly consolidated beds of mudstonc. sandstone, and shale,
formerly known as the lower mcmocr of the Troutdaie formation,
wtbh n 2.
[3-37]

-------
OG CDNTruacrriQNS to the htdhqlogv or the united states
* i z					
3*k» *~«-» *j S £*-ccc-<*<
-o«n»*d awMNAf*
ZXP±Zt*i7\ ON
•«u
w«n 0«n«rrtttM4 CalumOtO flive* 9qsqj]
.tfcMMf attfjCOT** «Mt# «T	"*» 00 3 Off
*OQ~
Can lours on theuogar lu/faes of me Cslumoiq 'inr 3aiaii
mnM»VM»V« Cjmnmr uttral 30 fmi.
LwW af or*o m a*ai mmH ¦* n «¦ iwer in* njrtac*
Ptavu X»p attmnat tt» *IHTnrt« Xta* roper mtu « t&* Catania* Sin* eaatft Dnmfl ¦ pan
rtftniaaii. One.
[3-38]

-------
GROO'D X\TS3. PORTt_Y.NO, ORES.
07
but recently named the Sanav River muustone, of eariyC) Pliocena
age (Tnmbie, 10621 The Sandy Rivor -nuiistonc docs not croo out
here. but. has been penetrated oy Weils ia uie eastern puxi ui tne
area. F-irther '.vest, the Sandy River pincues out against the west-
waxd-r.sing surface of the Columoia River basalt (pi. 1, section .1-/1').
The maximum Sickness peQctraLou was 223 feet in well 1X/1-34X2.
Tho 5-ir.ii" Rr-'e" "*.1:1:31020 u'-e'-r1 present, and the Columbia
R»ver jro ovor.a.r.	r. P .ul *.o
age. The TrouLdaie formation, '.vuicn is composed largely of peoola
conglomerate and sandstone, underlies the entire west-side business
district and extends to the cast, nor.li, and south beyond the limits
of this area. Its known thickness ranges from a few feet on ilia
slooea of the West Hiils, to 235 feet at weil L.V/1-33R2.
The gravei-sue particles of the conglomerate consist mostly of
Columbia. River basalt ana otaer volcanic rocks, bu: also contain
much auartzite, granite, ana metamorphic rocks typical of the uoper
Coiumoia River region. The sandstone is micaceous and is pre-
dominantly quart^ose. The T.-outdaie aDparentiy was deposited
on an eroccd surface of tne Sandy River muustone. Weil logs inuicaie
that :he contuct between the two units in this area ranges in aiutuda
from aoom 120 to more man 200 feet below sea level [pi. 1, section
Through most of the area the Troutdale formation is overlain by
a relatively chin mantle of unconsolidated terrace deposits of late
Pleistocene age. which arc par: of the deoosits cnllcd "ohl^r alluvium"
by Piocr (11K2, p. 23) and "Portland temice gravels" by Trvasiii-r
(1042). The deposits consist mostly of stratified and locally cross-
bedded travel and sand, and contain lesser amounts of silt and clay.
The clay and aiit, ni;::ouc:: comprising less than haif of the total
volume of :r.e unit, occur :n siz.iole hotiies at a few places in the arci,
and indicate that this unit prooably was laid uown under alternating
stream and quiet-water conaitions, or by streams uiscliurgmg into a
lake. For tnat reason. the unit is ticrem referred to as fluvtoiactistnnc
deposits The fluvioiactismne deoosics underlie terraces that nsc
from an altitude of about JO feet uo to the foot of the West Hiils at
an altitude of about 200 feet, and generally are less than 100 feet
thick.
Along the WUIametta River below an altitude of about 30 feet,
the terraces and flood plain arc underlain by alluvium of Recent age
and by artificial 511. These materials are predominantly unconsoli-
dated sand anil silt. Tbcv are commonly less than 50 feet thick where
penetrated by wells in the area, but probably thicken closer to dm
Willamette River.

-------
OS CONTrjOUTIO.NS 70 TH£ HYDROLOGY OF T~Z L'NtTED STATES
OCCLMiRENCU OF TUli GKOUND W'ATEK
CiZ21Z3.±L rSATC3£3 07 0CCtr3L22^CZ
Grounu water rtmy be defined as water mat occurs under hydrostatic
pressure below the land surface and completely saturates or fiila ail
pore snaces of the rock natcn.il in which it occurs. The upper surface
of sucti a ;one of saturation, :f unconnned, is coiled trie water taoie.
i"i!	~ n!:catorted gra-.-ci
and joints in basalt. The cr.nacitr of a rock material to transrv.ic
water is referred to as its permen-oiiity or transmissibuity. A rocs:
unit that is carmble of transmitting and yielding aDprcciubic amounts
of w^;er :o a well is called an aquifer.
[n audition to tuc uncontined. or water-ublc tyoc of occurrence
at niaccs ground water is conrined. Confined ground water occurs
where an aquifer :s overimn by a less permcabie layer that rctar-'a
tile upward movement of the water, and pressure i» exerted by tr.e
bead of water in the aquifer. Thus, the confined water :s under pres-
sure greater than that of the atmosphere and it rises above the base
of the confining layer in wells. The two pnnciaai types of livdrauiic
conditions in winch ground water occurs—confined mid uneunilned—
can be graaational. and an area in wtucn ground water is confined
under a smail hydrostatic hend can occur close to an area of unconnned
ground water.
Discharge of jtiuna water in tac area •:> mamiy by sec;'"^? :<¦>
the VTiilamette River and by withdrawal from weiis. Under laiurai
conditions, tiic water table was tuijiicr than the levei of ute river
dur.ng most of the year and ground water moved toward tiie nver and
discharged into its channel. Conversely, during high naxrs. the
n\"cr normally reached levcis considerably above those of the water
table, and water inriitraicd from the stream channel to the ground-
water body. Dunnij recent years, howercr, the water table has
declined at places to tlia extent that it remains lower than the nver
level throughout the year (pL 2).
Rcchai^c, or replenishment of ground water occurs in thu west
Portland area chiefly by infiltration from precipitation and from
streams. This nnturid recharge is augmented to some extent by
nrunc::il injection of water mio wells, [n addition, tuc amount
[3-40]

-------
caoc?ra	Portland, onzc.
09
of water avadablo for discharge from a particular aquifer may be
increased by water migrating from an adjacent aquifer
VArSS-3EAHC?Q C2^3-1CT23. 07 ?2Z 3.0CZ C7I17S
Tho principal aquifers underlying tae west Portland business
district are ia the Coiumoia River basalt and ta the Troutdaie forma-
tion. Other less imoortant aquifers are We Suviolacustnne ueposits
of lai.*	j c i-ri 'he al!:;-;ur; of Rocent ace, where these
units extend	;:>e v.ii.-r . io.„ T_j	>...
rocks of early Tertiary a^e beneatz tae Columbia Ri-cr busait nr.:
less permeable, ana the small amour.: of water they yield :s saline.
a roo"d ViTra r< the old eh seddic>t.irt rocxs
At least par; of tie finc-g-sincd sedimentary rocks of early Ternary
age that underlie the Columoia River busait in tnc '.vest Portland
area were deposited In a manne environment. [a nearby areas
where these rocks have been penetrated by weils they contain saline
water. This saline water probaoty is connate—that is, tae sediments
probably stiil contain some of :hc sea water m wLicn :hey ongtnaily
were deposited. Where tae over:;-;ng basalt has been :lev.ed ana
ruptured by tectonic movement the saime water may migrate uowaru
mto the basali ."rtJin the marine sedimentary rocics illar: and Xew-
corub, 1956, pi. IS).
OflOCXD ar.vTEH LM THE CDUMflU 111VEH UAMLT
In the Columbia River bosnlt the fractured and sconaceous zones
ia the UDper pnrts of many of the flow Inyers arc permeable and serve
as aquifers when they are saturated. The dense central parts of
tie flows are relatively impermeable, except where they are jointed
and fractured. In general, ground water can move freely through
the tabuiur -.ruerdow zones parallel to :se flow layers, but c:m move
across the Sows omy in rauior amounts. Where the basalt layers iro
tilted, the porous nterdow zones fartaer uowrsdip contnui water con-
fined by the dense, Ies3 permeable central parts of the luvu dows.
The permeable interflow zones arc noc everywhere continuous.
Each lava flow a limited ia extent, and its waier-bennng zone may be
discontinuous or mar merg9 with that of nn adjacent flow. Faulting
or intense folding1 of the basalt may have further interrupted the con-
tinuity of the permeable zones. Where faulting has occurred, the
water-oennng strata may have been crushed to form impermeable
material (gouge), or rany be oilset so that a permeable layer abuts
an impermeublo stratum. Folding of the basalt caused the layers to
shift along the mterllow ;ones. and in pliicw the^ once-permeable
material tuny have been cribbed to form » finer, less permeable
material.
[3-41]

-------
Old C0.\TftIBl."TIQ.N5 TO TJC IlVDnyLOCY OF TilZ UNITED 57,vT£j
Ei^tivcn wci!» in tho wcst-aiuo business district nru lino*n to have
been "Jnilcii into the Columbia River baaalt, and 13 -ire finished in
the bus It uitd obtain their water exclusively from a (table h. Three
wclLs urtu water from both tiie bnsult and :he overlying TroutdnJe
formation. The yields computed from test records '"or the 13 wcils
that tap toe busult average about 440 gpm. ^guiioas 3er ^nutcj, and
nms? from 50 to 1,000 gpm. Reported anwcop.Tis of the water levels
dunng Dumping of taesa weiis racq?u from 2S to 2GQ feet at pumping
rates of ^nn jr.d doO z?m. resoccuveiy {taolc I, weds IN/I-3-i.V-t and
34.\'i0, T_e ..lt-,-" j -r	.. < o vrs ^ -.bout ICO feet.
Tue maximum computed ipear.c capacity is .icou. 2: ,~P— per :
the minimum is 0 6 £?ni per ft, and the average is 4.3 gpm per ft.
ClltOC.VO WATER IN TUK 3.0 Of RXVEJl MCDSTTOM:
The Sandy River =uds;one is not tmoortant aj an aauifer m the
area. the mie-grained materials constituting this formation arc
relatively im permeable and yield little water to weils. Where
present, the Sandy Hirer mudstone forms on effective barr.er co the
vertical movement of water between permeable zones in the under-
lying basalt and those in the overiytng Troutdaie formation. and
connnes ground water in the uooer pert of tnc bnsnit. Most wells
that i.re driied into the Sandy River mucstone witaout baring ob-
tained a sumcicnt yield of \vmer are cttcnued through the formation
into tue underlying basdt.
OIIOOTD W.\TKR LV THE TflOlTTDA UK POFOIATIO*
The Troutdaie formation is the most productive source of ground
water m the area. Larg® yieius are obtuined from weU3 that tap
unconsolidated gravel and coarse sand in the formation. The sand
ami jjravei beds transmit water rendily in any direction, but a few
layers of ciav and mudstone in the Troutdaie Lieut the vertical move-
sent of the water. M.iny 01 me sand and gravei layers are com-
puted, cemented, or ^ave me uiLcrstices so 5JIea '-nth Sue material
that they co not transmit water readily. However, m most para of
the west Portland area the 3und and gravel ta the Troutdaie formation
act as a water-ubic type of aauifer.
In 1055, 14 weils were pumping water from the Troutdaie formation
for heating, cookng, and industrial use. This water was subsequently
metered and discharged to the city sewers. Several other wells,
including two at tho Equitable Building, are beiiaved to tap the
Troutdaie formation; however, water from these wells was not dis-
charged to the sewers, but was injected underground through another
well. The yields 01 the Equitable weils hare been estimated from
1 Sprcfte cftfftalT oJ * U • ruiv af tse *ucunr* 10 Ot	M ltr*4 juiuiwi *7 t&U
dtsuurc%. *ad uhmUt 11 o owo la	per ouui* ptr »01 ot anwto^a i;?a ?*r rj.

-------
GROUND W.VTSS. PORTUiN'O. OREC.
Oil
data denied from commercial pumaing teats and from the caoacity
ratings of the installed pumDs. The maximum reported rieid of a
wcil 13 iae Troutdaie formation -vas !,100 gpm of *atar wua an 30-
foot ura^cown of the water lem at '.red l,'l-3£;. The -v-v-v-"
reported yield was 3 gpm wna a urawcown of 45 feci at veil LN/I-
34P1. The average of the jieida of taa 14 weila was about 200 gpm.
Speciac caoacitics of taa weila that tap the Troutaaie formation were
:ot j "rom :ce 'ssuita of 14 commercial pumaiag testa. The
CJ«i-\->w» SDCc."*C	^"-w	~JZ T I vT ¦"•_ .	, • t —
tad tae average specie capacity ^aa aoout 7 gpm per ft.
Pumped withdrawal probably constitutes the major form of ground-
water cuscaarge from the Troutaaie formation in the area; maitration
from tae Willamette rurer probablr a the prmcipal source of recaarge
Co tee formation. lacitrauon of precipitation aiong tae oasa of tae
West Hiils probablr is aiso an important source of recharge.
At. additional source of rccaarg® to tae formation was suggested
by Hart and Nowcomb (1956, p. 66) who state that, along the club
of the acticliaa taat forma caa VTest Hills, the level oi the grouad
water m tae Coiumoia River aasQit drops about 160 feet from the
Tualatin Valley side on the west to :aa Fortiacd siae oc :ae east,
and that at piaces water probably ia raonr.g through the basalt from
west to east across tae structural ainae. At the eastern aase of the
West Hills, where the basalt has been strongly deformed, it 13 possible
that compression and teaaioa hare opened the joints in the basalt,
and allowed some tracer to migrate across the Sow layers into the
Troutdaie formation. To data, ao effects of this possible inter-
formiuional leakage nave been recoraed in the wese Portland area.
733 'J.'T»uTMt»rgAT. OF OB.OtTJTD WATSa
Waea a <*-eil that taos an miconaaed aquifer is pumaed. the water
taole m thB vicinity of tae wed a cravm aowa m the snaoe of ia
inverted cone, cailed tae cone of aepression. Thus, a hydraulic
gradient j established, and water from taa surrounding parts of the
aquifer moves toward the well. .Is pumping continues, the cone of
depression expands, but at a prograssiveiy siower rate, until it reacaea
an impermeable boar or a Line source of recafirge, or unui the cone
encompasses an area m which the recharge to the aquifer is equal to
the discharge. The drawdown of ground-water levels within the cons
of depression also increases until equilibrium is reached between
recharge and discharge. Figure 3 sno*n the hydraulic conditions
in the vicinity of a 'jreil pumping water from an unconcned aquifer.
Tho conditions m the nciaity of a well that discharges water frotn
a confined aquifer are rauca the same iia described above, except that
the pressure surface (pie^omctr.c surface; of the confined ground
[3-43]

-------
01- CO NT RIU L TJ 0 N a TO TilE HYOBOLOGV OF Tili L'.VITiD 5TA"S
I
Finns J.—niunaaauc otuaa isnotf • dimmm *aur-taoi« «rU. Ouuasa i-*'
rtotona tt* Wfm Ina iii suim r—lmiiiuimii i •run ktm. S*cuoa cte ibov* c»
coot ol — iirnnumgaiM. urm adeuilnein ol muf nntacoL
water, rather than the water tabie. is drau-n dou-n to form the cone
of depression.
If no recharge occurs in the arra of the cone of depression during
disccargs from a -vuter-tabie *«L the oniy- wnter available for dis-
charge js ^ater thai was previously sioreu :n the aquifer If tse
withdrawn! from an aquifer erceeds the recharge for an e.rteaded
period, a general lowering of the ground-water lerei occurs.
Where the cones of depression of adjacent wells overlap, there is
competition for the ground water in thai part of the aquifer between
the wells. The imount of wuLer monng toward caca wed :s decreased,
ana the drawdown of water le*eb for a jiven discharge a greater
than it would ba if the cones oi depression did not overlap.
The chief source of information on quantities of water withdrawn
from wells has been the Water Bureau of the city of Portland. All
well water that is wasted to theaty sewen is metered by that bureau

-------
GilOCNO T\rn. PORTL.I.VD, OREC.
013
for ^ew-uce charges. The meter records oro tho source of tha
puntputro il.ita presented in figure 4 and plait 2, mil in t^ble J.
Between 19.34 nnd ID5S, -G wciia m the west-suio business district
were resorted to be wast.ng wntcr to the city sewers at one lime or
another Dunn? J95S. 2Z veils *erc metered. Tn audit.on, tho
water from two shallow -veils Unit tap gravel (lX/l-j4.\'C ar.a
3-«Xo; a injected into a deep well '.hat taos basalt (lN/i-34.\'4)
alter the water a used to heat the Enustaole Budding. Conversely,
dumg ?e~ods waen tag healing weiis arc unused, tae deeper well
is		5 -	> • - :oz- ..oij:: -rater iad aiost oi :ae water
witaurawa a injectou tato tne two saa-low .reds.	waier i_i3
13 recharged intcrca ar.gcably between weils in gravel ana basait at
the Orccomaa Buiiding (wciis l/I-3£l, 3£2, and 3£3).
The water taat is injected into wells 13 aot metered, and thus tho
quantity ;s not known. The amount of ground water withdrawn for
cooimg or heating and wasted to tie sabers from Octooer 1954 to
December 1953 is suowa ia table 3. The values g'.vca represent
actual metered discharge, e.tcept for December 195S; the values for
that month were estimated from previous records by use c: temperaturo
and relative humiuity data.
It wiii oe noted :;iat ttie metered Turn page increased from about
7S0 acre-feet in 19aJ to about 1,500 acre-feet is 1933, an avcraca
increase of about 340 acrc-feet per year If the volume of ground
water that ia wasted to tne sewers continues to increase at the saco
average raic, it wdl amount to nearly 2.J00 acre-fect m 19C0. How-
ever, the city authorities of Portland have moved to restrict the disposal
to the sewers 01 waste water from future air-conditioning and heaung
systems, as that ornc:ice has progressively taxed the caDacity oc tho
sewer system. Tins move has imposed upon well owners and those
contemplating future installations the necessity to plan other methods
oi disDosni. such as returning the water underground through wcils.
Extensive artificial recnarge by use of these wasto waters may
assist in maintaining ground-water levels, but it may aiso raise proo-
lems concerning the temperature 01 water m a given aquifer, local
ovcrpumpmg and over-recnarg'.ng, and changes in tha chemical
quality of tne g*"oumi waters.
wmoanKa roo.M the tboctd.vix formation
During LQjS, the total metered pumpage from tho Trontdaia
formation within this area was about 4SQ acre-feet. The metered
pumpogc from that formation has increased steadily every year sinca
1955 to about 1,300 acre-feet in 195S—an increase of about 170
percent. Although the withdrawal during some months may havo
been less than that for the same month in preceding years, tha overall
effect lias boi*n one of progressive mcreisc of total yeariy 'vuburawol.
S-WTOS—i;	3

-------
014 co.NTiiiauTioiss to t::; :-iydrology of the united states
The dijcnargc from 11 ""oils was metered at some lime during i:us
period, but the records of discharge from some of those wells arc
incom niece.
'^TTtnDR.v.'A-u. FnoM Tin; coli'miiia nrvEn basalt
Tot-d ."".ctcrou pu.T.pngc from i::e Coju.riiui luvcr busni: was aboc.
300 acrc-fcct in 195o, ana aoout 510 acre-fert in 1053—an increase
of about TO percent. In early seven weik wcrr yielding water
from :~e busrxit and addition^ -.veils were beinv; linilcil into Some
¦">:* -	.J ~	J-?	VS ."r"	¦¦ _;c- 5
;"or rcclo .r.c T."ol.i.u«,c jr.::.-i. iTro\.i _ . .
wells ia the gravel of the Troiitdido wiil accept :hc desired amounts
of water.
FACrotts o>rr.LT?.ciNC wttudn_vwl
Many of ize weils w.jere wjier is metered ;ire one-Mod for air
conditiomng The amount of wucr withdrawn frrwn t:n-c	is
dependent noon many f-ictors, mi:vn~ which nre temperature. Iniiniui:y,
incoming soiar radiation, length of dayiignt, and sm^on oi the year.
Figure 4 shows clie jcncrul relationship between monthly metered
puinpega and the ruoncr.iy mean temperature. It :s arnarent from
tae reia::onstuDs siiowr'. in figure 4 that the total monthly pumoagc
increases greatly \ruii rising monttdy mean temperatures. Th:s :s
paniy Decause many air-condinonmg wcils are pumocu oniy aunr.g
the per.ods of wnrmest weamer. The tracer that is winuiraw-. during
moaths when mean temperatures are below about -toT is used
mainly for industrial purposes, for two rcrerse-cycle licanns; installa-
tions and for one dircet-cycie heating system. During tlic cooler
months the rate of ground-water u-itiidraw.il apparently anproaches
constant values (fig 4) that probauiy ore equivalent to the average
industrial and hi-ming demand.
i2TTT:C'JLL 3EC3J3GE
At leas: '.0 weils : in t;:e area reportedly ire or have been used for
injection of water to recharge t:ic iqun'crs. Oilier weils arc planned
for tins use in the future. At present H9JD), little uifomution
errors on tiie animmt. temperature. or aumity of the wmcr mjcctcu.
and there is no regulation of ::ns /ir:d.c:ai recharge The in'ount
of water rcc:iargcd appends rnostiy on :hc amounts of ivnu-r ncciicu
for air-conditioning and hcaung installations, as the waste water
from these installations constitutes the only wilier so rechorgrd at
the present tunc.
Some operators of air-conditioning plants withdraw or plun to
withdnnv water from basalt and recharge the wanned waste ratcr
* IN.l-XH* i tnt Natianai Oont; iNM-Ci.va. i.in4 3. Koxltab^ nuikltar tXH-WMt. Dfftta Mrtlmi
Cfnirr-	'.Hiil 3uilD
-------
cnoir.N'D watsu, poht:_i.\'d, oni:c.
015
3iC
3C0 —
e
u
<1
o
w
5 '30 —
<3
a
£XPIJM*T'CN
'31*
i9Ii
>956
o
1959
" 2S3 —
Ui	>
O
<	o
*
5 —
e
a
_ o
100—	0^x
I
50 -
:	i
;	f
20	40	so	a a	ro	ao
MONrm.r mcam TevPsnaruRe. it* oec»££S Pi*i«EM>iaT
Ftccm i— ItoulaaiMp at aaaUtfr ortml mogui to tfw rtwnuilr ana itmpmnw traa Ortottr
13M w .S'cnabrr IIBL
[3-47]

-------
OlG co.NTRiuirr.ONs to the hydrology of ruz lwitsij states
to the aquifers of tlic Troutdniu formation. Others pumo from the
Troutdaic and recharge to the basalt. Several opcraiors ore recharg-
ing. or ->i.in to recharge, wanned -vater to the gravels of :he Troutdalo
within auout 100 fee', of pree\:si.r.g weils t::at •vimuraw vater for
cooimg :rom the a«mc aquifer Thus, as water m ::ic aouti'cr oecomca
warmer, many wills, esoecmily most! near weils that rec^arg? warn
water to t:ie aauifer, 'viil yield tirn water that is less suitable for
cooling.
c-p.cr:.—.~iTrr. '^rrzzs r; T~r izz.1
Under natural condit.or.s an ovcr.iil balance exists oc: .vee:: :.:c '.%atcr
an anuifer receives anu tr.e water :t discharges; minor vanat.ons occur
in t:ie amount of water in stornge truhin an aouifer, a we 10 seasonal
and long-term d.iTercnces m tiie amount of water recharged and
discharged and tac rates ar.d times at which these admt.ons or.J losses
take place. The differences is 12c rates of saturai recnarg? :o uie
aquifer and of natural uiscnarge from the aquifer result in changed
the amount of water in storage, which are indicated by changes in
the altitude of tiie water taulc or piezomeiric surface. Outer natural
changes m groundwater levels are caused pmc: Dally by barometric
pressure changes, tiucs. and earthquakes. Changes of ground-water
levels aiso arc muuceu artiiiciuily by such practices as (IJ ar>.L2c:ai
rcetiarge of tno aquifers, iZ) paving or artificially uni^izg areas of
natural innltration (which decreases natural recharge;, and (3) with-
drawal from wells. These practices all aucct ground-water levels
in tiie downtown Portland urea.
Since September 1940, measurements of the depth to water in well
lX/l-3-iXl have beer, made monuiiy. Tlic well is loo feet deep and
taps the Troutdaic formation. It is at the southeast corner of 3W.
Sucth Avenue and Washington Street, near the aoproximate center
of punomg from the Troutaaie formation in the "vest-siuc business
distr.ct.
Plato 2 shows the hyarog^pn of well lX/l-3-iXL; graohs showing
seasonal vunnuons in puinpiige from tho observation wed and from
the Troutdaic formation and Coiumbm River basait; montaJy avemgt:
stu^'j of tae Willamette R.ver tit Portland; the mont.ilr prenpiULion
ia downtown Portland; and tho cumuiativo departure from average
monthly precipitation. This assemblage of data allows visual com-
parison of the water-level variations in the well with some of tho
factors that influence the vunntions.
Comparison of the hydrogmpo of weil lX/l-3-iXl and the pampaga
graphs shows the ejects of pumping on water levels in the well.
During the summer months, when pumping is greatest, the water
luvci in the well uecines, but \is pumping decreases during the fu.ll

-------
CilOCS'B ^ATSU, I*OR7LA.VD, QftEG.
017
and winter tho water level recovers to near the levei of the preceding
spring. It is noparent that tha year-to-yettr increase la tha total
quantity ot -vulct withdrawn "roa tee Troutdale format.on a this
area 13 paraileieu by a general liociaa a the summer mentn-*na water
levels a tad index weiL la every year that pumping from tie Trout-
daie formation is known :o have acrensed, the summer low water
levels a the well hava been lower than durag the preceding yean.
F.-sm .C'3~	:zi	nz iir^ost ste^cy re^enl
dcciae oi filler levels occurred. T-e caciac ..-oa ..'jo .o . jJI1
about 4 feet a the \nater hign levels and 9 feet a tho su^Lcer
low larela in tha observation weil Particularly notable is tho droo
in water levels from Mar through September -953, wnea a large
increase occurred m pumoag '"roci the Troutdale form-t.on.
Comparison of the well ana stream hynrograons scow that from
the begianag of tha record, oad especially before I05S, water levels
la tha well rose or fell mora or less synchronously *ith tne stage of
the Willamette River at Portland. The higaest stages a the WiUam-
etta River at Portland commonly occur as backwater from tae
asaual high stag? of the CoiumDia River a Mj.y, June, or July;
secondary h;gs stages occur a tna winter due to precipitation a tie
VTiilometta bosia. At times of low nver stage the groiad-water
level formerly stood ac or aoove tha altitude of tha nver, wnereas
only at high or nsuig nver stags was the altitude of water level a
the iad« well beiow the monthly average nver stage. Since tho
eariy part of 1957, this synchronism has a part persisted, but tha
level a the weil has been consistently lower than the stage of the
river. Thu3, a greater than normal hydraulic gradient has been
established from the Willamette River to the vicaity of the well, aad
the direction of tha gradient 3 maintained throughout the year. As
a result, recaarg? from the W-ii^-netta River :o the aouu'ers a the
Troutdale formation probaoiy ha3 increased substantially.
At the bottom of pute 2 is a bar graph showing tae monthly
precipitation measured at the U.3. Weatticr 3ureau Portland (city)
station; ]U3t aoova tha bar graph 3 a line graph showing the cumu-
lative departure of the montaly precipitation from tha averages for
1940-33. Comparison of the month-end ground-water levels and
the precipitation graphs indicates that precipitation has littla direct
or immediate effect upon the ground-water level in this weil, and tha
long-term trends in predpitauoo bear no relation to the year-to-year
decline a levels a tha weil from 1956 to 1959.
From 1940 to about November 1947 the cumulative departure
curve for the precipitation and the curve for ground-wnter levels
show a general sunuantv. However, the latter curve snows suarp
declines that reflect the acavy pumpag dunng the summer months,
[3-49]

-------
OlS CO.VTHIDUTIONS TO 7HZ HVDltOLOCY OF THE UNITED STATES
and rising trends that upparentiy coincided, with the onset of tho
autumn runs, but doubtless were partly duo to local recovery of
the Titer taoie as dumping of "-(iter for air conditioning wns reduced.
From L94S to L05J cumulative uepurturo from the arerago pre-
cipitation suowed an upward trena, whereas tue ooonta-^nu water
leveis remained near or siigatly below average. From the autumn
months of 1935 to January 19io the cumulative prccioiution curve
scow? a 5:,r.r^ 'jOTrnrd :rerd acd, exceot for minor variations. Iceis
or: .:::er	..'io ir—	-it ¦.	"3
1053. [a contrast, the waicr-ievei curve baa an overall uownw-.rt:
trenu, beginning in 1D.:,0 and continuing to the present (l?59i. Thus
there are two unnatural declining trends in the water level ji tsc
well—jr.e beginning m 19-iS ana the other in 195o—desoite •in
increase m precipitation anc a rcsuitant increase iz potential ground-
water reczr.rzc.
The indicated lack ot" reintioosciD between precipitation and
grour.d-w»ter levcia agrees quniiuuveiy with the factors governing
the direct recharge to the Troutdalc formation from precipitation.
The wes;-;iiie business district is larrsiy pnveu or occuotcd by build-
ings, so tnat opportunity for surface tr..titration .s practic-aily r.o.i-
e:cstent in the area, r.rounc well 1.X, 1-34.V1.
Effective recharge from precipitation prooabiy can occur or.!- :n
% few distant pitices, such cs at the base of the east slope of tac Wot
Hills. The interception of most of the precipitation by the pavement
and buildings probably explains the luck of nse in water level in wcil
lX/I-3-t.N'l after periods of heavy mm tail. However, it is difnctilt
to identify any recharge from ram because changes in the pumping
regimes asd recharge from the river tend to mask otner increments
of rechnrge.
Within a racius of 1.000 feet oi wei! !X, I—3-tN" 1 are slt wc-Is that
tap the Troutaaie formation. Two are used .'or the he-it:ng puaso
of a rsversc-cycie heating and cooling system, and aithough seidoci
pumped, frequently receive recharge water during the summer
months. Together they accept as much as 2S0 gpm of water, which
is recnarged to the T.-outdaie formation. The other four ncaray weiis
are capuole of a comoined yieid as great 03 1,290 gpm from tie
Troutdalo formatioa during penocs of peak demand.
Plate 2 indicates that the periods of low water levels in weil lX/1-
34Nl ore more directly related to periods 0/ lorga withdrawal from
the TroutdaJe formation than to any other factor. The periods of
low level m the well ore more dosdy reiated to total pumpngc from
the Troutdale formation than to pomptng from the well itself. There-
fore, it 13 concluded that the general downward trend in levels in ths
inde.T well has been caused mostly by the ycar-to-vear increase in
[3-50]

-------
GROL'N 0 WaXER. PORTLAND, OREC.
010
pnmp.isc from the aquifers of the Troutdale, and that the ahnxp
dcclints in ground-wmer levels during recent summers 'iro due mostly
to the increasing use of ground water for ur conditioning.
TZ:.t?E3ATT3.i 0? T2T 0B.0C7TD
Waier from rtic Tromdnic formation normally -a a; temperatiirea
ranging fron 55* to u-3aF. ar.»; water from Columbia River bisai
ranges from 54° to rO°F Terr.Deracjrre oi Traicr ii both aquifers
zr-j	..3 . :.z .1	. j v.:
titiii2:rg t;icsc t'.vo an'.huts nave oeen :nsiaiieti m tne Fqmcaoii: ar.u
Oregoni.in Buddings and are planned for otacr buddings.
Ubcn the suailow -veils that suoply tie Equiiaolc 3uJa:ng system
(l!S/I-G-tN" .and 34X5) xere drilled, the tcnrioeraturc of the ^ater
in the Trou'.ti.i:c for—.atton '-vas 63a to ouaF Heated cxtiaust Trar.er
from the systccn is rt:ciiiirg?ii to these ¦wciJs it temperatures of 75°
to S-5°F during ;:\c cooling pnnsc of the opcrntion. At :::c beginning
of the Iteming phase each umier. tne temperature of the n-.-Uer from
the u-o'tls is at or nrar the EcmDcrature of the e.'tiiaust water thnt was
recharged during the cooling priase. After aooitt the .Irs: u-eck of
pumping, during the licatir.g pnasc. tne icmcenturc of the ^"aier :n
the shfulow -.veils is aoout oo'F The chilled water exhausted during
the heating piuise is irtinci.dly reennrged to the basalt through
deep weil (l.\/1-34.\"-») at a temperature of about 4S"F. The witer-
bcanng rone tapped by that weil apparently a so permeable that tins
clullcd water moves outward and mixes freely xmh the natural water
in the aquifer. The ciuiled rec&argt xatcr reportedly docs not build
up to form ix substantial cone oi eievation (tne counterpart of the
cone of depression of a discharging ^eil) nor does its lower beat content
appreciably lower the normal 5-«"F temperature of the natural -rater
in the basalt aquifer
The bctinng .nui eoonr.g system us?ii by tne Orrgrjniar. Bmiding -sa
three-^eil system consisting of fxo weils for cooiing (lfl-3£l and
3.EC), wiucn draw "vater at 35"F from tie Troutdale formation ana a
deeper wcil for heating (I/1-3E3), whtcn obtains ^vater at 5S°F from
tbo Columbia Rjrcr busnic. After tne operation of the systom .iad
begun, it was found that water from the deeper well, 1/1-3E3, was les3
desirabio because of its higher mineral content, and for this reason
tho well is largely unused. Also, the deeper well has a limited capacity
for pumping and rechnrgc- The two "wells that tap the Troutdale
formation are used for both tho heating and cooling cycles, but a
part of the exhaust ^atcr from the cooiing system is injected at
temperatures as high as I20*F into die deep veil. Wlicn tha deep
well was pumpcti m January lOou, for liie first time in 3 years, the
¦water tcmncrnturc ^vns reportcii to be ?6°F. Tins higrutcmperaiuro
[3-51]

-------
029 CONTMDL'TTONS TO THE HYDROLOGY OF THE UNITED ST.VTE3
indicates taat ihcro is only limited movement oi the water outward
from the well into the basalt aquifer. Reportedly, the temperaturo
of the water in :na aeeo wcii aormaily 13 aboutSO'F aftar tha warmed
water from the cooling system has been .njcclcci throughout cha
si:rr*r-nr but tae ccrapcratura cirooa '.0 about oO°F after tha we'd :s
oucpcd for 5 domzs.
Heated or caoieu water tsat is recharged to an aquifer may ao^a
down the hydraulic gradient and adversely aifcct tae temperature of
water from cows-grauient wcila. If ma warmed waste waters from
sc"j-^ :oo' cr	2s? ¦p-ectcti •z:o tr.»» sarr.e aouifcr, it :s oro'oubia
Lie o~c:—. tenDerit.^a 01 ...s —Mur-i vaLor .2 .lit iq_ or
evcntuatly will r.se. 5uch a temperature rise would, of course, de-
crease the value of the ground water as a cootiag supply and rr.igst
limit its usefulness for otner purposes as well.
In other parts oi tie country a general nse in the terr.ncrature of
ground water m. certain aquiiers has been caused by using warmed
water for artificial recaarge. Concerning the use of war:ned water
for ar::nc!a] recaarge by one air-conditioning plant on Long Island,
N.Y., Brasaears (I94I, p. SIT—3IS) stated:
' 1 ' 1: sa larlustr-il pliat in Xirp Cauntv, whica coatinuoualv reeaar^ta
obcu; I -aniioQ :z»ons iia»iv. :.*:e '.ennenture of :ie water pumped Iroa tio sup?iv-
mil :acrrasefi aooui 23 decrees ii':er 1 lew aontis ot operauoc. The supplv
irei iai -ecai.—; -veil boci end id :ie laae !oraauoo sod are about 200 f«*.
apart, i: is sported i.'-.a: tSu ."-ac :a icripfrai^rs .ocrsascvl operaun; coatj
about 300 to 500 dollars a r-.onii.
A simiar warming of the water withdrawn from a supply well at
the Snohomish. Wusli., substation of the Bonneville Power Administra-
tion was due to r.earov artificial rcchargo with wanned water (Hart,
I05S, p. 37).
CSE2CCAI. aUAiITT OF THE GHOCND WAXES
Table 4 3rcscat3 chemical analyses of water from three wclii that
tap tae T.-oncuaie formation, four wciis that tao the Colombia Iwver
basalt, ana one well tnat is reported :o draw wutar from both fonna-
tions. More than one analysis is listed for four of tlie wcils chat
draw their suDply solely from the Colombia River basalt. Samoiea
Iroa those wells were taken at JiiTcrcnt times and the analyses snow
that the caenucal quality vanes with umo of 3ampLin§. The analysis
of one sampia from wcil 1/1-3E2, which taps tha Troutdale formation,
doubtless represents a mixture of tba natural water in that formation
with water that previously had been pumped from the basalt and
injected into tho well.
Water from tho Troutdaic formation is predominantly high in
calcium bicarbonato and 13 generally of good quality. Its pH ranges
[3-52]

-------
GctQtTNO T^rE.7, POrtTL.OJD. OUCC.
021
from 0.5 to 5.7 This water is considered moderately iuiru or hard;
the barunoss, as CaCOj, .ivect^ea 147 pom (porta per mdlioc) [or tha
Z somaics qquisscci. Chloride concent is !uw, :~<3 average was 23
pptii for 3 sunipies.
Analyses of two samslcs from each of four veils thai tap the Co-
lumbia River basalt (lNVl-3-iX-i and N13, 3-4P2, and 1/I-3E2) are
given :c table -i T!.e analyses suow chat tne xacer in :no basalt
-— SC'.. . . —	~ ic-i	-L~c s of ^serailr
poorer quality tuan water frora tnc Tfout^jjj formauun. Tze
hardness ranged from 110 ppm v moderately hard) to G30 ppm (very
hard.) Clilondo content ranged from 50 to 790 ppm. Comparison
of liie ddlercnt analyses for eaca of the wcUs inaicates that tie ciJo-
nco content increased consistently w-.th time to ail wells but 1/1-3EC,
wtucii rccejvcu mucn rccaargs water pumped fro in the Troutdaie
formation. The most recent analysts for wed 1 1-3E3 shows a de-
crease of 123 pom in tuc ctdor.iic content sir.ee llc previous analysis
7 years eariicr. Tins decrease probably was caused by the iajcc-oa
into this ••veil of water of lower cidonde content from the Troutdalo
formation. The harur.ess also decreased by 12 3Dra durtrg the soco
time, and the prl dropped from S2 to 7 2. The injection of water
from tne Trouiaale formation into tins -red. una the improvement
in chemical quality that apparently resulted, rcponeuly were not
accompanied by any noticeable change in temperature of die crater ta
the aquifers rccnar^ed.
In well lX/l-'JiXlC, which taps aquifers in both tfcc Troatdofo
formation ana tee Columbia River basalt, dissolved constituents
increased between November 15, 1053, when the first sample was
taken, and March 1. 1053. wuea the second sample was taken. The
cidonue content increased from 5DS to S40 ppm, and :he hardness
from j-iO to 6G3 ppm. Presumably, :ue increase .n the mineral con-
tent of tae water from that wet] 13 due principally to an increase in
the saiinity of water from the basalt aquifers tapped by the well.
II so, tha chance in water quality in the basalt aquifers doubtless
is even g-eaLer than indicated, because the water from those aquifera
is diluted, to some extent, by water from the T.-outuaie formation
befora it is discharged from tha well. Other possible conditions
that may have influenced tho measured increase in mineral content
of the well water are: the water in the basalt aquifers may be under
sufficient pressure to cause it to rise in tho well and aovs outward
into tha Trouulaia adjacent to tha well, and thus to decrease the
effectiveness of dilution by water from tho Troutdale formation;
or the basalt aquifera may be ihe more productive aquifers and may
supply a progressively greater part of the water pumped from Una
well.
[3-53]

-------
022 CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE t-iYDROLOCV OF THZ CNITTD ST.VTX3
Aa previously stated, tlic mineral content of water from tho basalt
wciia aaparer.tiy is increasing as the wpJs are pumDcd. The in-
crease :n the calcium content 'rcilec'.ed by ;he harunessj and the
chlondc cootcr.t of the water suggests that a different type of water
is migrating UDward from the underlying manae sedimentary tocks.
The saline water m tac seuimertary roc.ts underlying the basalt 13 aa
liTl'IS'I i' '"""a	-k,J *q 2S 2, '*ZIC^"Li0PdC —t-T W"^
tne ooecn .>2c:^-?a or 5crc.cr.ca uur.r.^ .Oiair.g
possibly sai more abundant and more open joints or.d fractures wmca
allow :ius water of poorer quality to migrate upward (Hart and
Xewcomb, 1955, pi. IS). Where tae basait aquifer is tapped by a
weil in or ne:ir such a fractured :one. drawdown of the water table or
reduction of artesian pressures due to pumping may cause larger
amounts of the saline water to migrate upwaru into the basalt aquifer
and thence to the well.
The belt of strongly folded basalt at the foot of the TVest Hills lias
always contained some saline water of this type. Weil l.\"/l-20Nl,
about 2 miles north of the area studied and owned by the North-
ern Pacific Tenr.mal Co , yielded such a hard and mildly salino
water as soon as it entered tne basait. The water from another well.
6 rmias north of the west-side business district at the Pennsylvania
Salt Co. plar.t, was too saline for plant use. Most of the weils tn
basalt beneath the west-side business district obtain water of this
type, which has varying degrees of hardness and salinity. The rain-
erri content was particularly troublesome in the deepest well. 1/1—
3Eo, at the Oregonian Budding, and suggests that the salinity of
water tn the basalt may increase wuh depm.
The chemical quality of the water in an aquifer can be altered
by recnorg; wuh water of a different tyoc frotr. another aquifer. For
e-tamsle, if antufera in the Troutriaie formation were recnarged with
the more saline water of tho Colucioia River basait, the water in tho
Troutdaic, especially near the recharge weil, prooabiy would havo
some of the undesirable characteristics of water from the basait.
Converseiy, recnorging tac basalt aquifers wuh water from the Trout-
dala formation, or with other water of good quality, migut improve
the quality of the water in the basait aquifers near the recnargs weil.
The chemistry of the waters must be considered carefully in planning
for tha ultimata maximum utilization of the two main ground-water
bodies beneath tha downtown Portland area. It is reiterated that
the water of good quality in the Trout dale formation, the upper aqui-
fer, can be impaired or rendered unfit for certain industrial uses if
water of poor quality is injected into the Troutdale in substantial
amounts.
[3-54]

-------
Gnuc:.o •AMTcr.. ?oict^i.\o, oki.g.
023
SUMMARY OK l'UOOLEMu
In view 01 tiic rapid ami continuing incrc-L>c in •.* lthdiawal of water
from luc Tiouca:iii; for.uution find tne Cuu.r.iuia River basalt, the
foilo^ing prouleins in tho west Portlar.u area may be expected to
incrc.vsc ur.lr*s a comprehensive plan 13 establisucd to control with-
drawal, armiuul recnarge, and t;ic temperature and quality 01* the
ground water
for ac-'.tir.g ami cooung purnoses prouaoiy wui cause i_ot:i:au.r.g
declines in j-ound-water levels, both in weiLs that tap the Trouuiale
formation and tn those that tap the Columbia River basait. The
declining trends will be offset to some extent by the current practice 01
ortinc.aily rcctuirging in some 01 trie weiLs. .Ls previously stated, the
decline of tiic water table in the Troutdale formation has established
a steeper than normal hydraulic gradient from the Willamette River
to aquifers 111 that formation, and may have induced substantially
greater recharge from the river to those aquifers. This induced
recharge aLo ^ould tend to onset the continuing ilc«.!i:ie in levels
m those -r|uu"er>. The degree of hydnuiic connection between the
"Willamette River and anuu'ers in tnc basalt is :iot known; however,
because the basalt, aquifers arc it considerable uenths beneath tiiu
nver, and arc overturn by mucn material of Io*v pcnncabiiuy, there
appears to be little possibility of artificially inducing substantial
recharge from the nvcr to those aquifers.
De'tnuration of chemical quality.—A lowering of artesian pressure
in tiic basait aquifers annarcntly has allowed the upwnra migration
of suiinc water from the underlying marine sedimentary roeks. If
these artesian pressures decline further because of continued intensive
pumping, further de'.cr.oration :a quality of the water in the busult
can be ejected, at least loc.ily The s.ninc water mi git also, con-
taminate aquifers in tuc Troutauie formation if the siuinc water is
used to recharge those aquifers artificially, or :f a weil taos aquifers
in botii the Troutdaie formation and the basalt and saline 
-------
02i cont^idl*t:on5 to -hie irrotioLocr of the	stated
such water depends largely on tho transmissibiiiLy of the aquifers—
that is, '.he capacity of the aquifers to carry the water away from the
well—ir.d on the amount of beatcd or cooled water i-liut. is mjecteu.
.Liuy caunge ia the temperature of ground water may raiiicaily
ctlcc: ".he usefulness of the water for some purposes. For example,
the warming produced by artificial recharje of an aquifer with warmed
exhaust water from an air-conuitionir.g aiant may impair the value of
'• ..w." r. ,z ? .. •_" r.i	j.-*-.	-ao1: '.2., "j*.-.re	,
a lower temperature, and improvo it for tuose that -.vant higher tem-
perature water for beating.
AruiiciaJ rechnrgs of the ground-water bodies ia the west-side busi-
ness district is likely to increase m the future, especially because of tha
reluctance of the city authorities to permit disposal of more heating
and cooling water to the sewer system. There is, at present, little
coordination between wcil operators m the withdrawal and rccnorgc
of groucu water. Because of tha lack of coordination, some well
operators may, througti artificial recharge, cause temperature charges
in the ground water that are incompatible with the needs of oilier
ground-water users.
Ottier problems.—The aforementioned changes :n the character of
the ground water and t!:e lowering of Ic-'cli m wcils in the west Port-
land ares, probably will cause economic or legal problems. For ex-
ample, the lowering of ground-water levels that would accompany
the expected increases in withdrawal would increase the costs of pump-
ing the ground water. Likewise, the operation of heating and cooling
plants with water of unsuitable temperature would decrease tha
•efficiency and increase the costs of such operations.
An unusual legil question not prcnously encountered ui Oregon
may ar.se as a result of '.he temocrature changes induced by artificial
recharge. That question is rcuether suca icmDcrsture enanges, t:ic-
might imoair the usefulness of tuc water for certa^i purposes, "aa-
Terseiy anect the public mteirst" should be considered a problem for
administration under the water laws of Oregon (Office of the State
Er.g-.^ecr, 1055, ChaD 337.170, p. 25).
An additional problem may develoo at those buddings m the area
that are founded on wooden piiings, d the water table declines below
tha tops of the pilings. Pilings thus exposed to aeration, or to re-
peated submergence and aeration probably would decay rapidly,
especially u untreated.
ADDITIONAL STUDIES NEEDED
A comprehensive plan for the development and management of
ground-water resources in tha west Portland district wouid aid in
insuring optimum use of this valuoolo resource aud in minimizing the
[3-5S]

-------
cnoir:»"o water, ror.Ti_o.'Dp orec.
ciTccts of the problems that arc now developing. As a basis for such <\
comorivic^ivc plan, the data now available allow oniy partial under-
stand.r.g of tne hydrologic factors involved. Additional si.iuics.
outlined below, Arc necueu to provide '.he information iccessury :or •.
betier understanuing of t;ic changing hydroiogicrcg'mcn of the area.
Mtamnment of 'jround-'caCir Uceis —The water levels n a lurgs-
percentage of tho noils in the wcsi-siiio district should be measured
ocro'-c- 1 ' v. it-.^:n^bas.o "o provide data ror rclatirg ^ater-
icvei c-tr.j*:a .0 pi-Tauge, j^ar.^es .."	::u .c."
turc, and politic changes in rccnarg? from the tt'dl.imolte lurer. In
order to uutiun tiic needed watcr-iovd data, it wiil bo accessary to-
aake an opening in the base of the pump or in die casing at niar.y-
01 the «c:U to pcrtv.it the insertion of a stcd upe or otner measuring
device.
Measurement of nrotind-'xctir Umpt-a'.xses.—Periodic measurement
of tiic temperature of water should be made at all wells during periods,
of pumping ir.d aruticml rccanrg«\ Tbe tcmocniture data thus ob-
tained would allow evaluation of the se-.isonal and lotig-tem etTects of
rec-argr.g tne aquifers vitti waters of unnatural temDenuures, and the
areal extent of sucfl eiTocts. In order to obtain the temocraturc data.
lC would be accessary to provide a samoling tap in the discharge and
injection pipes at the veils tvuere suca taps arc not already installed.
The sampling ups also would allow ibe collection of water samples
for chemical analyses, discussed below.
Analysis of ground ~icatcr samp its.—Systematic sampling ami
chemical analysis of tiic natural water m the aquifers, aad the water
introduced into the aquifers by artificial recharge, should be started
as soon as possible. More data on tbe chemical composition of the
waters arc needed to sredict any possible deleterious etTects of the
Etxsng of waters of unTercnt cucinc--; comoosiuon, ar.d to UL-tcrmino
changes m tiic salinity of water in tiie aquifers. TLc quality-of-water
data would serve to guide decisions concerning tiic areai distribution
and intensity of withdrawal from the basalt aouifcrs Those 
-------
026 CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE HYDP.OLOGT OF T1IE L'NITID ST.VTZS
PossioU improvement of water quality by artinciaL rec.iarge.~-Tub
injection oi water from the Troutdulc formation into well 1/1-3E3
apparently ixorovc«i. at least tcrr.porariy, the quality of water ia tiio
basaJt iquifcrs ir. vjL;r.:ty oi that well. This lac: invests iho
possibility oi improving the quality of the water ;n die busalc aquifers
throughout the .urn by a planned program of artificial reennrgo.
However, before suc:i a program couiti be undertaken, a preliminary
aoorusal would be needed to determiac the feasibility and probable
e'Ti.'.:. ."e-'-Oia >. . c	-*• . i jt	'rvnir?
the collection and interpretation of gcocncimcai liata ouia:;ic
-------
TABLES
[3-53]"

-------
T«iii K I —Htcoijt uj nfircimtiiln't ircHi in Ihc in W wit hi mum ilithirt i>J J'uillmul, ihif/
Allllu J* AlllitiJr uf Iuii4 ami I u r Jblmu a I »i H In I* 11 c iinuu iru U x bl, liilti|»*lnli 4 lium	lilt hihJ altuu u In luuitit fl^ui o «>ut tlllluJf. t>l(.ilm 4 l«|r U»«linf
la t»»*ii Iu|, tluf, l*i.
OiouimI i*bill uftuiKAft l), Cbuflm it m |%iilly tuiiA•! ilit nitli i at »kl »>i (i tluu^r
llllnulkfe t>, I III MllCwl «lldly»l> III l«l'li I ill tU.n>'|.i«|i trill, |«b)l I lo| AllliliI, ||^UI J»ll4t |«.f llltitl III,
'I • IK |». ICll«I*. I rtlUI C 41 Willi Iti 
  • k In >tt f lul. j uulnik Ik iiulH » «|iillt 11 ullti w'J'tl • vv«.u U jiwi Uikili^ (mult) a ~ i* i: h ( I* n ml li i iul« o h h r 1 IN II I I — — . - - — - - _ - — - — - ——- —— - Ml 1 Vount 4 6qu l«uu III ii 4 Hi i* k 11 Us /I U'uii# Z»l 1. ... ^iluuu| CtcuiliwH •> l»< i." Wl 131 4 klu U i'jUl lli.l toMl .. Uiiflilb lltitUi il I'f • lot l»«t> ill C j: A »ifc'»H IVlO i *i llikl >H0|. 1 z«g liflU WaiubuJ... it llirfkll 1 t ia.l 2*m .... I'uilUud Ic* inj j« in k llrf T 1 •' lixl i'uM Co iaii i .. IViIUjJ Caiuiiilt a i»i ni 1 a. r i *< lnj vt i'uliU l)oCk» iif ruuuiii .. •i • 1 . ri Jjhi .. llCK>*l ^IIUIBllUU luu iti i>*j III IU )tl IV li *ii a v; Kii if, r/^ i A 14 llu^'lUl i»u» .. t ic4 M«>«f luc MO i*i \n\ ll mi ifi r A JJMJ . lUuiy 'fllil* .... (a) hi .51 1 til} l-'j IU ll «. «*! ti w-l . . J S ^ ii^i ... U 1 IJllI'Mlll IIU in :»-j Jl) iJi lua Ju o luu July ll»l*i i (.•> A lUni, Su4lum 4 i llf«ii« Ii win ... I ICkl Kitluiiil luli in *u) lu lu III »i»l( *j uii I to Nbl l lllld I i i (- ihit; lucl rntui'k 4 n kl',uj M !•>«(«' J illicit 1. I iiiii|» J JO i|iui 04 iu J nuiii i. I lolliU -Ml I'I'lU, || lliillCiJ li I'l'll* I I Ol|» li' I llll|> lb' ru' * >1 11>. ll * hi C^liik 11 0 1 b cn a o o x Ut -I o a n o a o n o a -c o tJ <1 ci V, ri cj u\ fl r-» 11 U I o o

  • -------
    3JIU ...
    ... Jo	
    IOi
    l»f
    >u
    10
    MU
    ^ iilii
    3 * I»I
    Jll I
    |*»r|(lc TiU|'t»«in«
    A T(Ufi»|>b Co
    b|4liiir, I'uiIUiiJ
    A UflllQ llftU
    uu} Co
    TcidiIhaI !«• 4
    CulU b1
    ui
    «i
    1
    c
    
    3ll I .. .
    Ill i
    HIJ
    r JIM
    1 la v 1III fclcsl
    M.ilfl
    I'aiiUuJ llsU i*o .
    I uilUii«l tAiLiilu)
    1 lili C*u
    W rlftlUM 4 Oi>ia
    Ultf
    M
    XI
    >1
    J' 4
    In
    Ml
    III
    IH
    IbO
    K«
    11
    i:>
    c
    •
    •
    fl
    lli
    J1S*
    II H Null'mul llunk
    #¦ *0 met l| Unluil
    Allbll' '1 IhJIiI
    41
    In
    «»i
    HI
    «
    6
    11\
    ;m
    Ml
    l/)lM ...
    L<|ulUtU lilJg .
    IO
    1 n
    u j
    II
    lli
    ' JlM
    (lu	
    III
    in
    'ui
    11
    li
    ir.i
    j-«i
    ^ )IM
    . du	
    «o
    in
    Iwi
    IJ
    lui
    
    NkiIIimiiI I'kiliK
    1*0
    lUntbu llulrl . ..
    
    in
    b 1
    li
    
    JlNI .
    U
    l><
    .1
    Ui
    
    V llNi . .
    1 l|«ui«n W vllr A I'#
    to
    l>«
    «<»
    
    
    m
    I'M
    IllOftl ...
    U
    UI
    IUUJ
    
    
    II
    2iu
    tl
    •lu
    U
    
    
    r
    
    A
    
    
    . . >lu
    
    
    
    
    
    14
    4'A
    
    IliUJll
    O
    
    
    V
    US
    l.il
    
    
    tliuwi
    
    
    
    1
    1."
    fl
    Ut
    II
    .lu
    u
    
    
    
    
    14
    
    
    . llu
    
    
    
    1:
    1*
    fl
    
    
    Ofjul
    
    
    
    
    
    14
    Ui
    1
    . .|o .
    u
    "ji
    UlMlllUl I'Jl.
    r
    •»»'
    1 i.J
    ]>
    ;i
    • lu
    II
    j;
    1*1 .*tf I0|||
    r
    
    \
    liU
    iy
    III II11 ftll'l
    (J
    
    
    1
    
    M
    
    
    1 lift
    
    
    
    
    
    
    u
    w
    lllol.f
    u
    
    (M"Ul <018
    t
    
    If
    
    
    l> 1 1 IMI Itll <1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    JiO
    li#
    II D^ll . .
    1:
    y>
    1 tfi rmU l
    r
    U»I
    \
    
    
    
    
    
    I'MI
    
    
    
    
    lul
    H Mi'l mi 1
    II
    >1
    ^ t 1*1 !!•! ^ |J|)
    r
    >•1
    II
    
    
    $ l>i«i 1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Ul-vil
    
    
    
    1
    !•••
    14
    
    
    h«iin| *»ii«l
    II
    
    
    
    
    II
    
    
    fl »*• 1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    llus.l
    
    
    
    1
    Ji
    I.hI
    Um J |ui Jn|>oijl of » •!((
    Iitini uli iuii>Ulli>ithi|
    I'lunl I
    I iiii»|^h| ,V< CI'IU U'l Ail
    II I
    W «ln |c.» ii >i11 ||HII, t|.| 10
    Ml II U low io|i of
    lu.ln^ ' 11111(1 U)* I
    I iiii|> S/"
    t|»u« Vi«n1 |t SVatit
    I It |ii*i« klulit |
    li'
    I CHiJi
    I ijliil«.J J«l i.|>ui, JJ 1 ||
    ll|'llMtflU|l J
    Jl M lit <1 tl'lll |m| 1}
    mlii. it I if It 'I cuiii
    iS I
    I J*ll|*lli.I t||-4U»| II
    llwiili.tf •» ftlci lu lliouUl
    'I wlll|i tO- I
    W llfi fitting l>t fiuiu Ui ||
    Ivl 1U> || |titiii|^).| |!4l
    ll'IO, tl I	|U II
    I Ik 11 |>l lu IIU II *uti
    |Miiii|« 1	a i*iii «l«|
    «I*jiiI III ft flilll> cc*
    r 1
    I'lHiil* |Uti||»ill (of I III,
    J » iii|i
    •11 ;• 11 i«ui|i n*
    I'tlllM* I A»*||HU "|«HI|l
    U,' 1
    I ••••!• iC*
    I ••fllifli) ll>4 .1 fwl III 1UU
    vlll l*»l«ll >|
    t>il|'| lit » U ilCI Iwl » t|,|
    lul | I l> llllll I I I ill|l
    tt*
    O
    »
    o
    CI
    V!
    a
    ci
    p
    'O
    O
    ?
    P.
    O
    33
    ro
    CI
    O
    o
    

    -------
    Tamil I — HtcuiJt v] nincxulutiir Iitlli in Iht urtl mlt tiiimui 
    I'wU
    D
    2
    6
    &
    t
    1
    u
    Lt
    <•
    V V
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    i in
    Il } 1. — tl
    III
    1
    
    
    
    (liMdl
    
    
    	
    -
    
    II
    
    Dkiki MdJlal Ciii
    Ui,
    
    in
    till
    11
    
    111
    M
    lliaull
    cj
    
    A|.i II. tbU
    ....
    
    A
    . jitiii.
    ... Jo 	
    «
    l>i
    III
    1/
    3-1
    lJu
    111
    AiikI (n
    III* I.U.I
    
    u
    >
    10*
    flft
    ;w
    it
    •ii
    )u>
    Uik
    )tv
    1 ly
    01
    IUI
    1141
    ut
    Jittlld |iu%tl
    »i«4
    llwuU
    dw
    n
    40
    »bi> n. tun
    Muvrinl^i
    Itlll
    T
    T
    
    \
    t II
    >(H|« ..
    lliil tUltuoil Uftiih
    16
    1*1
    HI
    II
    JU
    JU
    Utf
    
    
    41
    A |>i •. iw:w .
    
    
    A
    >11111 ..
    ... 49	
    11
    in
    HI
    U
    in
    01
    ut
    UlHVil . . .
    
    II
    1. Uifl .
    
    
    II
    Ill 1
    >11) . .
    I'niflc T«U|4iun« i.
    Ce
    ... Ue 	
    it
    H
    n#
    iji
    K4
    cul
    •
    It
    i»
    iit
    lot
    411
    6mi4 nh 1
    u
    (.
    11
    Jl
    Uc|.I.imI)
    U| I'IajiI |*uni|o4
    ^|Uti (iii 13 Ln, J4 2iU
    lit !•* UUJ U (illlMJliJ
    w«U |i>r louiwtult
    |iu 44 ioi ii
    biiiyii ii)*,
    ftJItf	lit* |IU||i|il
    |ui tviiitt l.r UJ«ip
    «Jru|»« lb u* O I.
    i'nuifcr>| | Qui it.ia lul Ii
    Li, J4 II icii'it It'
    J'u>j)|«4 «I-o*jft )Ci> ||»iu
    61*
    I'm ti I *.4 ) niiu Jul I lit.
    44 il II f
    I I naj ||iia„ 44 )»
    II. JU |k.tu, J4 lift It
    O I
    1 uny U*
    o
    Gi
    O
    O
    O
    V,
    »1
    a
    a
    d
    o
    V.
    UJ
    d
    M
    W
    a
    »
    o
    p1
    o
    o
    O
    "i
    0
    M
    C
    V,
    o
    in
    M
    >
    H
    II
    u
    u
    I
    0}
    ro
    

    -------
    Ui 1 Uilii	
    rcifeitmuul Tlalii
    IVlftc l'»»u &
    I Ut>l l!u
    I'icilc tl#»l hJ
    llfcl ll» tlfili 4
    Ixiil i»Mbl)uA
    I itiJDutl#ul*J
    UIO*
    . ao 	
    1(0*4 Cfljr Hfitil,
    IlK
    IU
    lif
    
    II
    
    ..
    u
    Ui
    III
    
    
    
    fri
    l><
    11u
    IU
    .
    
    Ui
    in
    
    l«
    .til
    J-to
    M
    l>l
    tx
    ii
    
    Wl
    
    
    
    
    
    
    U)
    IU
    144
    it
    
    luj
    Li
    l>l
    2ai
    11
    
    1 JU
    
    
    
    
    
    lUri
    Ilu
    I'l
    ajj
    U
    lui
    l.'<
    
    
    
    
    
    III
    Ilu
    l»l
    ilu
    11
    i^ii
    1^1
    
    
    
    10
    iii)
    lui
    MO
    I'l
    dio
    10
    iu»
    u: o
    
    
    
    u
    110
    
    Ui
    III
    1:1
    10
    
    I4J
    O
    III
    X4J
    1
    in
    no
    
    
    
    
    
    3IS
    Ju
    lie
    IVt
    1
    
    
    IIU
    In
    • i»
    10
    ^i»
    S*»
    
    
    
    
    
    :u
    Ilu
    In
    i;j
    li lu
    yji
    i'-»
    111
    l>i
    IU)
    u
    IU)
    l'4J
    IIU
    in
    .'*5
    1
    u
    u;
    
    
    
    0
    IKS
    
    T. I U . II II
    |ikl ii
    6uJiJ
    fcittil
    . Ou
    . Uu
    buml «n I
    |ii«i I
    lliUhll
    UiiuI
    «(•»
    i*ii4
    tfiutfil
    Uu
    i la
    Ju
    DuimII
    Uiixl *n4
    gUtil
    liiauli
    Ullkil
    ilu
    tiutul. titm
    • Ih| |mC<*
    fll«%tl
    libull
    (llHUl
    u
    
    u
    u
    u
    it
    
    6)
    
    il
    II
    I'l
    u
    101
    c
    w
    u
    w
    <;
    
    u
    luo
    ti
    ILU
    u
    lui
    i:
    »l
    llti .
    M«r i*, it:?
    lv:o
    1619
    Juiii IUIJ
    Jh«»ljn(> tWit
    July lOli .
    uaxUi iwu
    IU19
    IW'.U
    I lllll I tl -J
    
    JU)
    A
    1
    lui
    A
    T
    li
    A
    r
    toft)
    \
    
    
    It
    
    
    A
    
    
    II
    T
    
    A II
    
    
    A II
    -•
    
    II II
    ...
    
    A
    1
    l»
    1- 1
    1
    IA)
    l<. 1
    1
    lit
    A
    
    
    A
    
    
    il
    
    -
    4
    'luu^l II* I
    I liltiM ||iUl lul 10 lif
    c*. It tliy Iji | inuijilu
    I ftiMp 14s
    J tllll|K *1 (4il H'411, 44 V4
    li. hii	44 144 il
    I
    I'tiiui* 4 «UJ	Iff
    11, »l4 M it J
    44* I.
    >1 1U cilo 376 l i »m, |.tf4iii u
    jj) |.j til
    |'udi|* J fl'"». 44
    il 'lui.iiU)1
    I utitj* I IU» ||iiu lui 2t
    II.	4 1 |U li, | luj ||.ni
    '.4 lr 44 j>) Il Uu % |»i« li>i
    31 hi, 4-1 jv li fkinn
    41* 4: I
    i'i>4 vul tf •<> <
    I uinu J j'O *jiui iw I
    In, 4 I 61 U*i^|l |Ul || Itlttu
    W1 c '
    >| Jill gi'lil Jul |0
    In. >14 41 II 1 Ui	1
    I UII1|*J I.J |ian, 44 III
    Il 'I « in|> Ui*
    I II lit | I &JU |l lU, 4 | ij
    Il 'limn -41
    I uni|« I W (|
    H
    W
    :j
    *TJ
    O
    53
    g
    o
    o
    S3
    tn
    O
    C
    C J
    

    -------
    03'2 CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE HYDROLOGY OF THE UNITED STATES
    TaJILZ 2.— DniUrt togs of rrpTtitntatict wellt
    iTtauuvt iiriucnonie imoibo sr J. 0. 3ra«n- *nnl onureruanu tanaiorm mia U 3. G«L Sarrfr
    uyiai
    
    4 "Mrt'i Drotn 1
    
    I TSlcf-t Oaota
    Materials
    ! icu e (toon .!
    *•1 atfrUis
    1 sau • ifreu
    
    1 :fmu |
    
    1 ffeac) 1
    
    t.N/l-^U, Umat
    Owiai C*.
    
    
    rDnU*d ay *>l. JtooMO
    On:U£cC^.
    
    Alluvium ir.d Troutdaie ¦ ' I	\Uumuri and Trouulaie I
    C.A.. 3.". >• i	 i\j u ijflJ. 	 t
    S.ind, Cry	....		 10 ! 20 C*a>- icd ;-a^ol	, 59 12 \
    Gra\ci, c.*v		! 41 I 61 ''	Graiei. •araicr-oesnr;.., 2 !125
    ill1	I
    1MH.3.MI. CrtfflU lllMo MUla
    iOrtUnl ir	Drjlnc Ci. .Ttel
    Fluviolac.utr.-c deposiu !
    and Trout£aleif) |
    loraiuo:.	l
    Rock, saociv		! 22
    Gravel, lar;:	I	10
    Gravel 		;	13
    Sand aod jra^ei	20
    Gnvei	..I	20
    Gravel. =uady		I	IT
    "Grav-el..		9
    Gravei, loose		21
    
    1
    ,! T.-outdaje formation:
    
    |
    
    '1 Gfavei, ccmealcd.		
    4
    'us
    
    Gravel, loose..	......
    «V*
    .155
    
    Saad and pavel	
    20
    i lis
    3:
    I Sxndr Sjver mudstoae:
    
    1
    45
    1 isnd	
    10
    195
    ao
    ' 'Sand *oc^"	
    J
    ,1'JS
    04
    , CIav, -td		
    s:
    235
    Hi
    '1 Columoii PaM?r Saaftlt:
    
    1
    120
    I "Saad rocl ' , basnO--
    
    2SS
    141
    "Lava rock."	
    3
    201
    
    | Rock, iara				
    10-i
    3U5
    i*n-sDi.
    rDnllW ir >triBO*a Dm. iKSI
    FluvioLacustnne deoosita 1
    
    
    and arvauai all:
    
    
    'Till"	1
    5
    s
    S-ind and sil:. veilow	j
    64
    ;o
    Troutdan; or:iai.on: I
    
    
    Grave. Sro^vJ
    
    
    cemented			;
    13
    ss
    Gra\et, 'oo>e.		
    •»
    OJ
    Gravel. jra>-, cemented.!
    54
    146
    Slit, veilow		....!
    10
    156
    Columbia River basalt:
    Rocfc. decomoosed	
    Rock, aard..._.
    Rock. aLacx..........
    Buaii. -jnj. ;n»	
    P.ocx, "iearav. ' y»v..
    Rocx. blacK and
    hooevcomoeu	
    Raev, hlnc^, "seamy
    
    i'l • "T
    31
    1244
    JO
    I20J
    53
    331
    j
    356
    u
    1
    3G2
    33
    ,400
    l.NM-a.Mi Hnr Ttan*
    [Onltnt br A. II. Jtamn Onuin* Cj.. .mi)
    Slope wash. 3uviolacu»»
    
    i
    i
    Columbia River buait:
    
    tnoe deposits, and
    
    1
    Rock. lava_	J 15
    125
    TrouutnleiD forma-
    
    1
    Rocx. brown and black.Jl3t>
    231
    tion:
    
    1
    1
    
    Rock, broken, and clay.
    110
    no 1
    1
    1
    
    

    -------
    GHOLWD WATER. PORTT-A.VD. OREO.	033
    TaDlc 2.—Drulera ',o*T>iti i
    1
    1 TMr« 1 Droia
    MtlfruJ
    
    i'C-01) '
    ] M*Wfl*lJ
    iei>
    • .\ft>
    
    1 u*l 1
    
    [
    j (rt*il
    i
    
    IN-I-UOI. VJi
    . >*U*w
    U IU««, iUdJw* SnM(fe
    
    
    
    tDniied Or t
    M. tiorn Drullax C->.
    
    
    Flui talacustrnc deooxiU i
    i
    | Caiumota Rjver biuait
    |
    i
    and T-outjaic
    i •
    
    P.ock,. 'av&		
    7**
    zuo
    j — j.
    
    
    — ~C "3i.» 	
    
    -» —
    Sand	
    
    
    . P.oc», SiaL., -.a.-.:	
    .Z?
    •S Ct
    Grav el. .oose			
    	 ,o
    ut. j.
    iloen. Srokcn	
    ..! :6
    300
    Troutdaie formation
    1
    Rock, some water	
    13
    1-103
    Gravei. cemeeiid.
    		 12 1
    1=3 i|
    j Sand. iJiac*	
    m * TiIiiivr Ct.
    r3n:!(l ir ^ .'onium Dnlllm Cz, Iltr Cvjine ^rfuruoi, 30 ts ZSSft!
    Fluviclacustnne deposits
    i ' ! 1
    1 1 .
    acd T.'outdaie
    ; i !
    formation.
    
    Gravei	JI0
    ;:o 1
    Gravel, nater-oear;:'.?.. 10
    • .'jj i ,
    ' 1 i
    l.NM-WFI. Tmwmmm In * C«i4 3unn c«.
    IDr-iinl 5r Orrrol" Hill" Lot 'arauOtd Sr 0. £. JlnnjMl
    Unrecorded	
    :i
    31 ¦
    Sanav Pjvcr -nudstone.
    
    
    Alluvium i?)t TrouidueO
    
    i
    Ciav, v-eilovr; over-
    
    
    Formation, ami saiirlv
    
    
    lyin? day. red, blue.
    
    
    River nudstone:
    
    
    JOft	
    GI 3&S
    Gravei. cemented......
    149
    180
    Columbia River basalt:
    
    
    Sand, bard. and ciav,
    
    
    Omit, hard__.......
    31>»
    410H
    blue.. 		
    05
    243
    limit. alternate lav.
    
    
    Gravel and sand, ce-
    
    
    era !urd and soil.
    
    
    mented	
    G4
    300 ;
    ;ome 
    -------
    034 C0NTIUDCTTQ>.*S TO THE HYDROLOGY OF THE O.TTED STATES
    TaHUS 2,—DruUrs' lo<}3 of 'esreienlaiu* 'Stils—C>nun |
    
    nra
    1 ('Ml
    dm j
    Po#u*a4
    (OflllaJ Or ft J Sinoir Dryiloc Cj • '942. Ca»ioi perfwwd, *0 10 ft)
    Alluvium
    C'JV	 10
    Cfivp' aie:ac	' 30
    30
    GO
    Troutaaicl'", tormiiion; [
    Gravel. csneated.	.. 13
    73
    cx:ar;r
    iM/i-m.ni. v«jMd - Gatubrrc
    [T3a::«3 if A \t. Jaoiuui Snillac C->. :M)|
    wTcavatioa	
    Alliiviura and ijvioia- |
    custnae deposit].
    Sacd a=d gravel.	..! 2S
    Gravel		...! 9
    Sand arid ;ra\el, water- !
    bearing		! 15
    Gravel	! 20
    Trousdale for~auon. |
    Gravel, ceraeived	! 5
    10
    3fi
    -ij
    GO
    SO
    35
    TroutdaJe formation—Can.,
    Gravel. loose. waLer-	|
    beano;..	...J CO 1105
    Gravei				! 3 10S
    Sand	I 3 jl 11
    Gravel	J : 113
    Sand and	ira- i
    :er-6earr.;	! 24 137
    Saod. bUck. aoa rocs. ,
    «»ter-oeanag	.! 22 159
    C.S. ImOmaai 3m>
    IFarsalr Calirt -Irani" Tiitia. OrCW ST u .\l. ;iaua Onl^at Co. :M|
    i
    Sandv River mudstonf:
    1
    [
    
    i
    cu»			
    .! co
    34
    ;
    "Sand roclt"...	...
    ¦»
    36
    130
    c:»v	
    
    402
    157 ,
    Columbia Paver haaoit:
    
    
    174 t
    riocic	
    J i
    403
    Fluviolncmtr.nc deposi:*
    and r.*on(d.'ue for- I
    mat ton:	|
    So record, old *'ell.....l 130
    Sand and gran;l	i "
    Gravel	] IT
    I
    ¦Uluvuim. rtuMolacus-
    tnne deooaiu. And
    Trouidaiev'! forma-
    :ion-
    Sill and sand with
    jriiel lenaes tev-
    ca\iuoni			
    Gravel and boulders	
    Gravel...............
    Sand and gravel	
    15
    15
    30
    45
    10
    55
    12
    67
    INfi-UNI. CqalLdbl* SsUUinc
    ',OnU«UbT\ M. -mcurs	Ci.. '^*4. Cj*ios pvrtoracM. *0 to 1*0 ft I
    Troutdaie formation. '
    Gravel. jli^QUv ct> |
    mciucd. xaier-
    bvmni:.............. SS
    Sandv illv er mudjtonir. |
    C!av, 'jlue	i IS
    15-5
    i
    u~
    [3-6S]
    

    -------
    gsocnd w\xsb, Portland. onsc.	O3o
    Table 2.— DrxUcrs' logt of representaitiK ucllt—Continued
    
    TMe*-| DrfUft 1
    
    i
    T^K« f D*ota
    MourtoJf
    iw |  I
    
    1
    t
    t.Nr]-U?<4. Co11**** Bmddlmc
    (Dnum 3? v. :¦!. lumjra 2nWsi Cou .M«|
    Alluvium. riuvioiacus- I
    inne d'TXXMie. and j
    T-iuttfajc 'orrna- I
    . o-
    Geavpi	lo™
    Sand* River nudaionc ,
    C'.av	i .v,
    CUv i»i(A Med,	.. 51
    Ciav	;i2o
    i
    Columbia diver limit:
    Rock..			
    Rock, porous.	
    "Sa-d ' :oarse •»aic*-
    .100
    I :o
    ¦»70
    1500
    I
    illl
    ;5io
    '370
    INA-WNi Gauufti* StiUuc
    (SflU«4 5y ^ V. «aaa9«a DrtUlac Co,. Cuu( jwrtormirt 5wi U3 to lIT .1 £roa "S vo itt rvl
    Alluvium. .luviolacustnne >
    deposits, and T.-out- '
    dole formation	i
    Gravei and bouiden	 35
    Gravel. cemcmetl	! 20
    Sand and n-jic.*- I
    beanrti;		-1107
    jj
    i jo
    I
    1162
    Sandy River -nmlstone:
    Clay, blue	........
    3 (S3
    {Xtt-UXli. OlauMalCM
    IDrtllM ttr Une» 5t»ytr. ifcl|
    Fluviolacustnnc deposits:
    Clay, sandy....	.... 20
    Gravel				 55
    Trout dale formation:
    Gravei. crmcntrd	; 75
    Gravel, txwidery	.J 50
    Gravel, cemented	! 35
    :9
    75
    ISO
    :ud
    25.1
    Sand* River mudjione:
    CUv, rcllonr		
    Columrnm River basalt:
    ftoct, SUcl:.	.....
    Rock. hard, bloc*....
    Basalt, softer	.....
    ..,132 ,^S5
    • 15
    .! a
    v«
    i
    . i
    400
    [425
    501
    IM/l-y.VIl. DtouMNUCia*
    iDnilnl 5r Linn iunrt, :sui- Cmnf xnnM. la .E3 r.l
    nuviolac-.iainne deposits
    and Trouttiaic for-
    auuon:
    Sand, yellow	......
    Gravei. cetaenied......
    Sand			
    Gravel, cemented.....
    15
    no
    5
    133
    !5
    125
    130
    263
    Sandv River mudstone:	I
    Cla*. yello». anil rock..! 50 127
    Coluraoia Riv er Saaait: I |
    D&soji.	51 <13
    

    -------
    03li CO.VTIUDCTIONS TO THZ HYDROLOG" OF THE UNITED STATES
    T\3Ll 2 —Dnilen' ton» of repreatntuine •xciLi—Continued
    i TMt*J Dmta
    ! Tlilct^
    D»orn
    Muriw ; -i™ ;rmi
    'IftUfittiS t
    ' lf*l;
    ' irmi 1 '|
    1 ' i
    i Cc«u ;
    
    IVI-J4NII. II-
    « (Waft W Sam FrmiMaf*
    
    'Dntlct r»y 'l J iinutr SniUog Cj.
    IWi Camp.r "*rt>r»crt ZOO to 71i ft |
    
    Fluv ioiacu-.tr..ir* dcnosiu
    •
    •
    i
    januv iliv »• Tiucatone—
    .
    i
    
    aoc T.-auidalei
    
    
    Coru-nucd
    
    ...
    ^o"cc"'"~ i >-...u..,.
    »
    , t
    W • "V ** »
    
    
    ianc. p.icivcd '	
    :
    IS
    viiccorr:pa^a)
    
    
    Gravel and boulde-J..
    IS
    ' :i>
    Gravel ana ciav	...
    ¦ u7
    402
    Grav. ana ciav	
    
    ' 57 :
    Columoia Paver paaait:
    ¦
    
    T.*outda:e fnr-i.mon:
    1
    1
    Rock. '".ard. ;reea	
    1 10
    ¦412
    ; met 113 ">in-
    1
    1
    "Con^iomera^." bard..
    ' :o
    ¦»22
    ac >c.n lOinc
    
    • 1
    Rock, j-ecn	
    ' u
    ¦440
    va.i.-	
    
    |60 !
    Rock. joit. oLacic	
    : -io
    4sn-
    u.\a
    CJL.NwH
    mmt Omul Mala Bfutb
    
    
    |Ontt»0 »¦
    II. J. Jtni
    jar Dnllutc Cj .!»»"
    
    
    Alluvium and tfuviola- '
    cusir:r.e deoosiu: 1
    No record iopeo sna/t)	 17
    Gravel and ooulderc. i
    cemented	1 «
    Silt. \ el low	 3
    TroutC-ile for—ation i
    Gravei inc aoulders. '
    cer*.cited	; CO
    Cav113
    NO
    155
    m
    213
    213
    •»
    353
    t—05
    '•JDliJ:
    Sandv Riv er mucston^-
    
    
    Contir.uetl
    
    
    Gav. orown	...
    3'4
    305
    Silt and sand		
    22
    327
    Ciav arown		
    IS
    345
    Columoia River 3u&alt
    
    
    ((iecarnooaeu'}
    
    
    Rock 'eazn .n aronn
    
    
    ciay	
    43
    393
    Columoia River suuit:
    
    
    Roc*, hard. -jv..	
    G
    390
    Rock. »roua. black	
    3
    4C2
    Ciav, orotrn	
    7
    409
    Rock, K.ard. biaci »od
    
    
    	
    25
    
    Rock, slacx. soiver	
    15
    450
    Rock. bLicx wit.i clay
    
    
    ta crtvicw.	....
    4
    454
    Rock, porous, black.
    38
    492
    ao mter	....
    Rock, bard and
    
    
    creviced, black......
    41
    533
    Rock, porous, black
    
    545
    watcr-oearinc	
    12
    Hock, hurd. black	
    4
    540
    [3-63]
    

    -------
    GnOlW'D WATER, PORTLAND. OR£C.	037
    TaALC 2.—Dmitri' of revr*3tnia£tce -CdciUnuctJ
    
    fiiciH D«ocQ
    
    
    1
    TiJCt
    i
    i Dirua
    Material!
    ica
    1 i.aatt
    
    
    
    noa
    (IWi)
    
    
    1
    I
    
    
    emu
    1
    1
    
    lS,l4iSU Plr*i N
    B*a«
    
    
    'QrV.'rd 3T Oa.tqq ud Sinm *31
    
    
    Alluvium, .luvioiaeustrrne
    
    ;
    >
    
    t
    ,nd and ciav, bJu«r—
    
    
    deoosic-i icd T.-out-
    
    
    
    
    Continued
    
    j
    datei"') formation:
    
    |
    
    
    Cav, !avercd arown. j
    
    |
    Gravel		
    S5
    ! 33
    11
    bUck, blue and veilow.
    73
    325
    G-a.»t iz : aao	
    35
    ;;C
    
    r
    "l* =*• zui.i
    
    
    T.-au'.ca o
    
    
    
    
    ROC/. Z'O^Z iZL. Z dC\,
    ». «i
    11J
    Gravel, coarse		i
    i j
    > Loo
    11
    
    Roc it. poroud. some .
    
    1
    Gravel, •vitu coooles and j
    
    1
    
    
    water.			i
    53
    c%93
    boulden.		{
    :o
    'l35
    
    Rock, turd, btacx. crater
    
    i
    Ciav, blue and green	|
    5
    1100
    !l
    
    level dropped -0 it...!
    15
    :so3
    Gravel, hard	j
    30
    2=0
    j!
    
    Rocx. bUck. "coarse |
    
    1
    Sandv River muiisione: 1
    
    
    
    
    cutusa '	|
    20
    5:3
    Sand, bard	
    Jo
    1-55
    
    
    Rock. 3orous, biacv.	1
    15
    
    Sand and ciav, blue	
    5
    ,uo
    1
    
    Roe*, sard		j
    i
    '3-u
    "Hard seed" Csandy ¦
    
    1
    r
    
    1
    
    ;
    bed, cemented?!	1
    
    ^;f>
    1.
    
    
    
    1
    IN/I-44PT fVUJc TnnMM A T«NMm c*
    [Driilad by I. \f ;unn OrXlncCo.
    I
    Ailuviura md Trout- >
    daJei'5 .'ormauon:
    C.av	.			 ¦»
    3ouide*a and :^-avei		 31 j 35
    "Pjjcw" (gravelT,	: 37 72
    I Saodv Riser mudscooe. ,
    I Ciav. broiro and blue..'	5
    , Saac				I
    j "Roc*.' (iar.cstoce'I...	H
    i	
    1 73
    I QO
    pi.l-iin. P»oflc Tiin—— * T.inim c>
    [ OnjJrU OT R. J. Mnmrr DtllH-n: Co. :S10I
    
    !
    Columbia River basalt—
    
    
    15
    12
    Continued
    
    1
    
    
    "Conqiomentc." hard..
    lt>
    301
    H
    
    Rock. iard. blacv	
    37
    
    
    
    "Conglomerate ' bard..
    »
    ¦W0
    
    
    3asui^ b-irc. 3iar>»	
    "5
    i^-*S
    
    
    Rock, \eilow		
    17
    :-405
    02
    lia
    "Conwomeraie '	
    31
    Uso
    -i-4
    160 ,
    "Shaie. ' hard, brotrn..
    30
    ;523
    2
    17? '
    Basalt, znv and black
    31
    557
    ! 1
    1S3 ! Rock, porous, blac*.
    
    
    
    »
    *aier-oe:inni;		—
    13
    j* 0
    
    '
    Bauxt. bard, biacic
    
    1
    57
    :jo ;
    »nd 5mv	
    55
    G25
    30
    Kb
    "Shale." bard, dark....
    21
    jG-40
    
    fas
    Rock, porous, black.
    
    673
    23
    351 1
    water-b^anng	
    32
    
    1
    Basalt, very hard.
    
    
    CI
    « |
    black	
    19
    i697
    3
    r.- 1
    
    
    1
    I
    Alluvium:
    Sand. yellow	.j
    Gravel, boulders and •
    ciav		!
    Gravel ind bouider;.
    loose	
    Troutaaie lornsauon. i
    Gravel anu cur		
    Gravel, cemented		
    Clay, blue	
    Gravel and ciav	;
    Sandv H_ver mucsujnc
    Sand. nit. some gravel, j
    dark	|
    Clay, Drown...			
    Sand. green..			
    Sandstone	—
    Columbia River basalt:
    Basalt, blac*	
    Rock, gray—	
    [3-69]
    

    -------
    OSS co.vraiBcno.va to the htdrologt of tee cnitsd states
    T vQlz 2.—QnUtrt' latjt of 'epresenialiie zedr—Continued
    
    Titei-
    Draia
    ;j
    T^lc*-
    Dtsia
    Miuntit
    nna
    (tc«n
    \(utrulj
    neft»
    (inn
    
    [Inn
    
    1
    (teal)
    
    
    lil-jOl.
    
    
    
    [Onllart 5T
    v. *.l. *urtMQ Onlllnc C» . .Wl(
    
    
    Fluvioiacustr.ne desosits
    
    
    i Fluvtolftcutnne deposits,
    
    
    and Tr-outda^i''
    
    
    ii etc.—Continued
    12
    137
    formation
    
    
    II Gravel, coarse, consid*
    21
    153
    = ^	
    4
    
    ' 'ra-Me 	
    20
    1 o-
    iani. .2^-re. i.-i.
    
    si
    Gra*.». ("Mj1 -	
    j
    1 - J
    Gfj%e:. some \atcr i;
    
    
    ,1 ;and. coarse ana ;ravel.
    :a
    -nr
    95 j.	.....
    20
    105
    •, Gravel, coats*	
    
    
    Sacii. coarse. and
    
    
    i| Gravel, -vaier-oeanng..
    
    
    gravei. sligntly
    
    
    ¦1
    
    
    cemented.		
    :o
    ICS
    !l
    ii
    
    
    1/1-JD4.	fl»l Frdml S»naf * Liu
    ,3nll««l 3T it. SUIIIK DrUlac CJ- :51i. Con yalartft. S3 to ~ ::|
    Fluviolacustnre deposits:
    Soil and sil		
    iand. aroui			
    Trouiialev^ 'or—.auoa.
    Gravei, cemented	
    Sand and ^nvei,
    *.*iter-oeans?	
    Trcutdale for-rstion
    Gmvel. nmeatec......
    Ctai\ ssnav, arown....
    Sand, gravel and cut,
    blue, some water.....
    Gravel, cemented	
    Saad. gravel sad ciav,
    blue...		
    Saad and gravel, loose,
    watur-ocann?..
    10
    10
    2S
    J6
    :s
    62
    2!
    S3
    13
    101
    12
    113
    
    NO
    13
    153
    73
    ra
    7
    237
    I
    iandv River sudstone' |
    Cl»f. blue. some jravel.
    Clav, bro*-r>			|
    Shale. i»rt. sr-ea	j
    Clav. brown, and jome I
    joaie. sreen			i
    Oa~ bro»n		'
    jandstoce. arotrn sad
    jra*			:
    Coiumoia River basalt i
    (decoopoaed?!: i
    Clar, brojrn. and some I
    basalt..
    30
    ,257
    33
    '300
    V
    ,202
    :s
    1330
    3
    3C3
    '.3
    ,3-io
    S
    i3S2
    Columoia River basalt:
    Basalt. =a*	
    IS
    t
    367
    3G8
    [SrlUal 37 r>
    \n-iOl. LiM Owtdla* C«.
    Sum*r 3niLlai Ca. .D9. Cuutt peroruva :na 3to l .0 rt ud 'rata [3S io 3TT f
    Fluviolacuscnae deposits:
    
    ,
    T.-ouuine fonation—Con.
    
    
    No record, eseavauoo	
    1=
    12 ¦
    Gravel aed sand, loose.
    
    
    Saod...				
    7
    10 !
    water-tteanns	....
    IS
    140
    Sand and boulders.
    
    l
    Gravel, cemented		
    53
    103
    lar^e	
    
    cts :
    Gravel, loose, and sand.
    0
    :o7
    Troutaaiir'.'orraauoa.
    
    
    Sandy SiverO mud-
    
    
    Gravel, cemented. Large.
    57
    33 I
    no oe:
    
    
    Trouulaie formation:
    
    I
    CUr. bine....			
    21
    223
    Clay, sand, aad jrsvei.
    42
    125 j
    
    
    
    [3-T0]
    

    -------
    GnOL*>*D WATES. POHTLA.VD, OR-C.	039
    TaOLE 2.—Drillers' loijs of rcpracntalite -sellj—Continued
    
    'Hilc*-
    D«oth i
    
    TJat*-. D»oin
    Maunal*
    aa
    Ueti) ;
    itmunli
    
    
    (Io»u
    
    
    (»*> 1
    t/7-3EU Oi¦^oniA* 3«lidin| Ca»
    lOrtHad if 1 J Stnrmr Onliiat Co.. 1MT. Cacuk ptfionud rrea C? '«n IC it uui (im m t# us r:|
    Fluviolacubtnne drnoaiu j
    ana ir::r.ciai nil I
    
    iroulCaic 'orT.ai.or
    Gravel, cenvucd	I 41
    Gravel jaiid and clav . 14
    113
    127
    Trout dale formation—Con.
    Sand »nd gravel. loose.
    if:	
    C "a •" .T ~ ' r".. ...
    Sand ind z-a\ ei loose. \
    watrr-bearinc.	
    Gravel. cemented	
    IS
    14
    142
    •ISO
    C03
    l/l*J£^ Or^vnua S«ildlB| C*»
    OrOd 5f R ! S:mxuer Dr**!i3€ Ca . lft*r Cass* >vtor*trt 'nm *3 :o lU tu lidto UBto 173
    idO u> 170 it. %aA 191 -a „-ja ;l Gr»**. luco U) ::s u;
    Fluvioiacusir.nc dcposiu:
    
    
    Sand, brown	
    01
    01 |
    il
    Troutdale formation
    
    Gravel, cemented	
    .< i
    123 •!
    Sand ana ;nvel. Ioo>c.
    
    I
    trater-r>earinc.		
    12
    140 i'
    Sand, ^avcl ana ciav..
    10
    I5'l |;
    Gravel, cemented	
    32
    ioi •
    T.-outdale formaton—Coo.
    Sand and jravet. n-ater-
    beannc..		 10
    Gravel, cemented	 IS
    Clav c-fnisn-nlue	 2
    Columoi.v Huf bMalt. I
    Rock. lard. b-acK		 4
    ;::o
    ¦22s
    31
    i/l-an
    IDtiOad KrUI.i
    BalMlm Caw
    Oriniac Cx,
    Fltivtolaciiacrtnc depoauj:
    iilt and dav. arv	
    Troutaale lormuuon.
    Gravel, cemented...	
    Saud. sravcl. some
    water.		-
    Gravel, cemented	
    Sand iuq iravel, .-ari-
    coiorua. vatcr-
    bearin;	
    >and. alaeK	
    Gravel, cemented	
    Sand and $rav el, ivatcr-
    bearia?..		
    Grav <*i and cUv 		
    Columoia fUvcr naaait.
    Rock. lard. ;rav	...
    Rack. jofc, yeiiow	
    Rock. iiard. rrav	
    Rock. soft, green		
    Rock, hard, black......
    "Conglomerate." some
    «ucr	...........
    Rock. hard, jray	...
    S3
    S3 .
    41
    154 1
    m
    137 '
    
    170 •
    21
    191
    2
    i'in
    0
    l'J3 |
    23
    1
    J
    +n, 1
    ••J
    14
    2G0 1
    27
    237
    I'J
    J06
    41
    J47
    40
    387
    3
    390
    33
    475
    Columbia River basalt—
    Continued
    Rock. joU. ?rav	
    "Conglomerate."
    Rock. jolt. ;rav	...
    Ruck. hard. 	...
    Rock. Jolt, porou.i.
    yrav		
    Rocw. ~ard. jrav
    3
    6
    13
    lt>
    38
    S3
    Rock, sol'., bmcx..	! 16
    95
    S3
    Rock. -.ard.
    Rocw. ioit, black	
    Rock. hard. blac*	
    Rock. soft, blacx	
    Rock. laro. srav	
    Rock. soi*.. blacK	
    Rock. hard. ?ra»	...
    Rock, soft. red and
    black	...
    Rock. Iiard. red	
    Rock, hlaek. caving,
    with red deposits,
    nraler-beanng	
    Rock. hard, gray—...
    12
    5
    1
    5
    17
    13
    21
    J
    I
    ¦503
    !S09
    ;324
    j540
    i3T6
    ;s5o
    673
    1770
    |S3o
    S42
    |S34
    '362
    863
    363
    SS3
    SOS
    923
    030
    [3-71J
    

    -------
    04Q CONTRIBUTION'S TO THE HTDROLQGY OF THE CVITSD STATES
    T.vaL2 2.— Dri'dtri' lotji of revreirnlaiirt -jetii—Continued
    
    T^tefJ Dooib
    1
    Tliet
    3*ota
    Materials
    n#tss
    Jmii
    
    
    l'e*U
    
    ' (feet»
    
    1
    "«U
    
    
    m-iSi. 3*Uot Mt^r< Umm
    
    
    CDni;«l 5f n ; Stmwr 3im:a« Cj . Casjoc norforauu from :3 u» ia» ft u4 Iran £3 u iui rt
    Fluviolacuatr.ne deooaita
    J
    ;
    1
    I Trouttlatc 'ar^auon
    
    
    1=^ T"*u: J * e
    
    
    ¦jra -,-u :	
    .0
    22
    jri i. **
    
    
    sr.z. ¦ cj.
    
    
    CUv, jar.cv		
    ! 43
    43
    waur-ocor.a*.......
    2Z
    HO
    Gravel, cemented	
    I IS
    ol
    i Crave! aad iintl, vcrv
    Sand, some water	...
    ! 5
    
    Sac.
    "
    131
    Clav and crave!		
    14
    | i0
    1
    i/i-irt.
    P«Haa4
    Ci — ai C«vt( C*»
    
    
    !Dulled 3r v. \t. ;aaa»Q 3r'-L^; Ci. .X"
    
    
    Fluviolacust.~:ie desosiu
    
    
    Troutdile fomaooo—Con.
    
    
    a.-.- rroutdaiei,';
    
    
    ! Sana aid some ;ravcl..
    40
    137
    formation'
    
    
    Gravel, waier-oearinc..
    tj
    173
    ?and					
    10
    10 1 SaJid a.-.d rravel		
    43
    ro
    Gravel as J boulders	
    -0
    -tu
    ! Sandy Pai cr 'nua>iont.
    
    
    Shale	......
    *>
    
    C!av, blue............
    
    
    Sand and gravel	
    13
    60
    Clav, vellow		
    
    313
    Clav. vesiow	
    
    uj
    iand and ;ra\ci.
    Tromaaie farrrauon
    
    
    waier-owinc	
    -J
    I-.0
    Grave!, cemented	...
    30
    05 ;i Columoia IViier Oaaaii.
    
    
    Gravel, loose..........
    
    LIT
    [Lni-t —n
    3CU
    
    1
    
    
    
    UWaU Pwtie*« JU1 Mwwe
    
    
    ! Suited by x \f. J&niara DnllLec Ca.
    . :3BL Cirni cotjrwd. :u to Stni
    
    Flavioiaciismne deposits
    
    1
    Troutdaie fornrumc Coo.
    
    
    and T.-outduicv"')
    
    || Graves touoc, vaier-
    
    
    (ormauou.
    
    
    beanr-i:	
    4
    170
    Sand, loose, and div	
    00
    00 j
    Sand jiid cravcl.
    
    
    Trou:ilaic .'or-uuoo.
    
    
    ccne-.'.eu			
    :o
    :oo
    ittna and travel.
    
    '
    Sonu. oose. and "avei.
    o
    ~li
    cemeoico	
    
    1";
    Sana. !oo»e. pun	
    1U
    :i3
    Gravel, cemented. .wd
    
    1
    iar.U. ;rce:i. and rot*.
    
    
    
    < .
    1C6
    1
    Iook. ratcr-oearin;..
    ZO
    '
    
    
    
    
    Ul-*CL ftaaa
    City 9»"«. Im.
    
    
    lOmiM ar a. M. i«oi
    ims Onuiat Co.. :an
    
    
    RuvioLacuair.ne detxwiu
    
    
    Trouuiale reformation—
    
    
    and Trouui*iet?)
    
    
    Continued
    
    
    formation:
    
    
    Clay and "TWk"	
    *5
    OS
    
    23
    "0
    flnH ap|f| .
    04
    1G2
    Boulder.......	
    '}
    .13
    Clav and "roe*"	
    10
    i::
    Gravel	
    
    04 j
    Coiumoia llivrr await:
    
    •»
    •Mlock"	
    'J
    73 !
    
    
    
    [3-72]"
    

    -------
    Ta tit l 3
    Vt-ur
    I'ulliptl gu
    fruiu
    Jan li-
    my
    I'ult-
    luury
    Mi.tilt
    A|irll
    Mi.y
    Julio
    July
    An-
    giifcl
    Hl |i-
    Uiii-
    l.i'i
    Oct..
    IlLl
    No-
    vel.i-
    I.Lf
    l>u-
    ii in -
    l«.r
    TutuU
    IU5I ...
    "|"i	
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    ~1
    •Jl u
    8 1
    •j 7 7
    
    •|'c	
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    lb 1.
    8 0
    " " * *
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    IU55	
    'i'otali
    Tl	
    1o	
    17 8
    8 0
    JO 1
    lit a
    I'll .1
    
    I'J '1
    '.'0
    67 1
    28 ii
    31
    II 7
    1 1 1
    .IU
    "_'»j il
    1 1
    ifin
    :inu
    I'JSU	
    Tululd
    Tl	
    '1 o	
    .17
    17 4
    'J 1
    31
    till J
    J S
    J.'i
    II tt
    1 0
    :sn
    nr. i
    IS 7
    6(1
    ma 7	
    'It	
    Ic	
    :n n
    1 5
    t.U 8
    II (j
    48 7
    0 A
    :u 8
    jj a
    118 B
    ¦1H 4
    nm i
    £0 7
    till 4
    a i u
    IJII u
    4-' 1
    a i
    7ii :¦
    07
    18 II
    88 7
    II 7
    o j ¦>
    7 0
    I. ono
    jno
    
    Tul.iU
    .18
    1.7
    Ml
    10
    IJU
    ll.ll
    170
    1 t.U
    :i hi
    I'.'O
    1 (10
    1 (IU
    1. 500
    ntr.8...
    'U	
    '1 o	
    'Ii 'J
    a u
    III '1
    1 1 O
    Ul II
    U S
    H*i '1
    III 0
    i:ih u
    LU 1
    llil. '1
    (ill 1
    1 IH II
    U7 0
    1 .IH L
    7o 4
    i.i.i .1
    l.l 7
    HI* 'i
    Jl
    67 8
    10 U
    •	17
    •	in
    1. J00
    MO
    
    '1*111II13
    iimi
    lllll
    lllll
    1 IU
    i'ji>
    'J Jll
    'J .Ml
    'JIO
    •JIIU
    1 ID
    lllll
    lllll
    1. bilO
    u
    I
    -J
    CJ
    

    -------
    1 aim L -I thdiiiait uiiu/||i(i uj wati.1 Jiuin u ifft uj tht imf ii'i/c tuimoi Ju/juf, I'oiltanJ, On yon
    (In |'*iU |Kt itilllluu	ll>c li^l 4 lltiiii 11, 1 luiilUwU luiiiialluii, 11, I vltioil !• Illtci l>*i»ll|
    U ill
    I»%lc ul lollci lion ..
    Aijullil ((wiiimtluii)
    btlui IbiUil
    It on lie) lluul) . ...
    Iuii|vitrii |Mo) ...
    (Mi iuiii |l 	
    Moimlimit lTumI ioll.li
    k>»t«u . . ...
    lUll'tii* OU C«fft|>Olft
    lion 	
    Iliitlum m i'*CJOi	
    None*! LouiU	
    InuOo, .... ...
    h«i|Ac ruii«lu(l4m•
    ill . .
    IN/I
    IN/I
    liNl
    IN/I
    jini.*
    IN/I
    llNll
    JlN J
    
    
    
    
    
    Ofi n.
    Jui 9.
    M»i 0.
    Not II
    f i »i i.
    Nou in
    Mar 1.
    IUtu«
    IHM
    IJ 11
    IVU »
    W'.i *
    Ui WA •
    IKil*
    II
    'lc
    lc
    11 A 1 c
    it \ it
    1c
    'U
    *3
    II
    
    O
    
    
    
    Ml
    .3
    
    J V
    
    
    
    ¦.
    
    
    0 J
    
    
    
    II
    II
    
    IWI
    
    ft4
    
    10
    1
    
    IJ
    
    	
    I	
    111
    
    31ft
    
    ...
    
    
    	
    III
    11
    liil
    bl
    u
    "*'ii *
    	
    
    Uil)
    
    
    II
    
    13
    
    
    
    n
    X4
    iOO
    M
    no
    Ui
    )to
    
    
    .
    1
    
    
    
    .. ..
    
    
    4 1
    
    
    
    	
    	
    .
    I ;iu
    
    
    
    id
    
    
    
    
    
    
    lit
    Ill
    300
    no
    
    164
    
    id
    1
    
    
    
    
    	
    
    
    1 110
    
    i fctn
    
    3 110
    «i
    1 ft
    I 1
    i •
    7 I
    
    ft ft
    IN.I )|| i
    Aft J
    It'll »
    'lc
    41
    IV
    u
    u
    I	I
    Uu
    III
    0
    II
    4.1
    6
    IH
    I
    I I
    Mm I.
    IWi •
    lc
    III
    UO
    
    I 010
    I I
    l/l ltl
    luno II,
    lf»1 •
    'I I
    01
    M
    JO
    II
    4 I
    • I
    II
    I
    I ft
    IM
    0
    ti
    11
    l/l IK)
    inly I.
    m) i
    'it
    u
    11
    u
    u
    ttl
    3 S
    I'4
    0
    CO
    I I
    July II.
    UUi •
    11 4 'I c
    41
    I
    4i
    It#
    6
    IS
    13
    hi*
    ' 31
    I 3
    l/l II )
    J 4 11 I
    It tft •
    1M
    I
    I't
    I.'I
    I J
    1 I
    J 4
    vn
    111
    11
    I Anuljrlil l»y Clitillon | ilufiluild, l*U4ll&ittJ
    I Ait»l>iU !•> U 0 Orol fiiiitty
    • Aiisl>ili l.y il.« I |o» C» , Ljc
    * U'llii lium 1 e lullu>liir< 4 l»| ullAdtlKiliiijf
    I If Oil lull uluililiiuill Vtltlo
    o
    M*f I.
    IkfU ¦
    1c
    0
    4-
    1	j
    O
    o
    X
    ~ i
    d
    a
    n
    o
    • y
    u'>
    H
    O
    IH
    *ttl
    III
    ftuO
    I 6)0
    1 3
    9
    a
    p
    o
    r*
    D
    O
    o
    "1
    U
    n
    v;
    n
    ft
    o
    Ui
    ~I
    >¦
    H
    |1
    CO
    I
    N
    A
    

    -------
    fa t Jl'n
    
    ix/mm
    milli ii bi*u a in 1'aiiimi in im mi in11 in*'ii
    tilt# hi-A u ^ t.fv'w*" •• Iiwi.rj
    | . • i A'l HittH
    %!•••¦ •	 •	.1 Ml
    I'll - ••¦¦•!». ...» 4 • «« 4- ,	1,1. • • • •
    I- $ I.			 M •	. 			•
    I lu.
    | >. -fliij.ila If*'1 9 • J I 0 . "I « II I
    • ».. » |	. I ' 		 »» . —I
    III ll lllllli '•> "lllill 'I	I
    I , I -.11
    i/r
    "i-
    i
    w
    Ul
    

    -------
    V/Ki'wYx z/^/yy
    "9WWa'W4.
    dmmte
    l.lw*n|i •!!«• U I I•••*•! •• ll'J'i/ «>¦'! k'll./t
    7»*«• . '•'•J'll.'-I* I ••
    ¦ . }•• »•».!.'A-;. r1:.;.
    '¦¦a
    -^'•V ^
    tSKOI.IMiie MAI' III** A I'AIIT OF IMIIITI.ANII. 4illlt ;
    -------
    WATER-SUPPLY PAPER
    PLATE I
    EXPLANATION
    Qa*
    C ]	Alluvium ami artificial fill
    I mnrnll y mm/ ,» »d «t/r rtr futmttr'4 'Jtmmt pi*f t* •»/ f/l« l(»nrr I i* mw r—lt •» •• >« I h«« "	^
    Sttjr*f /Atrl; /«m»J «ff»M u# /»//. /* ytrf rWN«r«tfl#	C.4mm/wm •»
    UisaiL Itmmer i	otM*r rv4eame rnekM and yvurtrtt* S»mmntmn* prrdmmt++nll* y«nnzum» hmW
    mciurroHj Yi*id* r—tdsmu to Inr^t quitntitis* of w*i+r lw irWij
    iiiii-ii: *	; >
    I C
    ' <
    Sandy River muiistone	^
    .WttdiUir. -^«ir. <1*4	•*:	* rwm** bmt ufmr* ml	»• iw/f *•#	^
    11 rrua wfM	}*i'Wd« httU MKfki «w/»	I j_
    ,-77.
    7//
    Columbia River basait
    Oar*-yra» to-Mack dmtt locally 30»T»/»»nric jinrummni toir-oirr-T-T bm*wtt	.mrtnrr
    rxrtvi whm trudtd. ,Maximum thiekniiM uuiaf Imtij'trt Yiridi mmtmn it tnr^r	•>/mirr
    la wmtLi	'
    Indefinite or inferred contact
    o5"'
    Unused well
    3MI
    Us«d well
    

    -------
    M'uJoUiin
    a'
    3ise I'Om U. S 3«H0gicai Survey
    Porttanc auac.-angie. '.95-
    JOCT-
    .1
    .4'
    [3-78]
    

    -------
    Ojwrgu
    
    lioin ii. S Geologic*! Suivey
    I'uiIIjoU qujcJi angle.
    Geology dftci I) I I inn Lie (11)0 7 anil
    INUC X MAf1 SHOW!'
    4M*OllH»ll M|**|
    OICllXAIn.'. IV4I
    VtllllCAl I	IIAIIOH X 4
    VAN*
    SLA UVEl
    200'
    JOO*
    400
    t»oov
    too
    JOO
    oia«i
    IU(k|
    C.1COLOC.IC MAP OK A l'AHT OF l»OUTLANI>, OltKCON, HIIOWINO THIS LOCATION OK Ml
    SCAl £ 1.24 OOO
    j	O	j H.lt
    COMIOUIl INICDVAl 10 ret I
    IIAIUH IS MIAN i>£A |(Vll
    CO
    I
    ^>1
    CD
    

    -------
    WAI t-Fi-SUPPLY PAPER 1619-0
    PLATE 1
    ^ i
    S
    Si
    EXPLANATION
    r
    0*
    Alluvium and artificial nil
    L
    :	>
    I	c:
    Predominant! y .mnri and till drptmifcd vn (he jhmui pin in ut thr Willu mrttr /{utrr	l**x than j	<£
    jttferf thick. Irtrf mle? areas or' artificial fill, largely derived from R*evnt allanmn. isi^nti! j »#/..#»#/ //#•• :	3
    Portland water J rani Cuarxer *and ami gravel yields mtnirntir ./m»wMf>n •»/" abater tn nrlls	'	£
    I	Ui
    gflj	j?
    Fluviolacustrine ">?osi:3
    Luconsunaatec jntcei. ^ana. clay, anil nit. .nuxtty straty'iea unit lurniln rrnxsitrrtileii. A* "turn >•* /'»ij*rt
    thick. E^Vwed 'il'CUtxtudes abort ill feet. Yields small to mxiiemtr i/uiiniitf* •>/ 'litter In writ*	^
    |TT
    • ••
    I*. •.
    ,\v ft..:;.'
    'V ' •
    Sandy River mudstone
    I
    Trcutdale formation
    Conglomerate. sandstone', shale. and mudstone; tuffaeeous in p.irt. Conglomrrnte mutty Columbia Riser
    basalt. lesser amounts of other volcanic roaks and quartnu. Sandstone predominantly qutirtzuse and
    micaceous. Yields muderate to large quantities of water to veils
    ! >
    £
    E
    Mudjuh«. shale. and sand-iume; not tnmmi bit occurs at death in onrt of the arm.
    | {Mown rn cross sectum 
    -------
    2
    ?5
    3	- - -
    *****
    i*-
    
    
    aw
    I
    i;
    S 1A»-
    !„-
    s i
    IT
    M*
    |
    IB
    4
    J'.l
    : •
    i i
    I :
    l'/i jcHl A I H i. /'i LMaI. !M '..hi
    «/rM«
    t rf>UWW
    1 f
    -m\ \ /i ?*
    / W/i; y/1 w
    WM 1.
    ¦kxmkttt m*ji | t
    Jr !
    tti -Evo.. »r» sirjn.
    
    H
    ' 1
    | V! 1f
    !
    , j !
    
    i
    mMgoMVasaaMH
    »o»r>*.f Mua met
    1 *x u > xirau au»(>
    3 —
    « I
    1	¦"
    2
    H
    ?S -i.
    !
    !
    : ; i i I
    >A«SMamc iMOtCATQ * wo® aov( »o«a
    -anow a«o. sr MCVfMO. a* «ckajco o**xmjnrrr rom
    smsuMQ-mtt* k	a a r
    C»^»ruwfT fern ifCMMq
    i
    tv-
    : t
    * •
    r^j
    i r
    c
    r
    iii.ilii
    LkJi
    ¦ ill.
    jJLL
    GRAPHS SHOWING WATER LEVELS IN WELL tN/l-JiN'l. METERED ?UM?ACErHOM THa
    MONTHLY AVERAGE STAGE OF THE WILLAMETTE RIVER
    AND CUMULATIVE DEPARTURE FROM AVERAGE
    

    -------
    V mjm—r.t rao» w^LL	t
    r rr?
    i
    nU
    i
    ! f'"
    i r •
    1 J
    r^——!
    i
    ia»»
    1
    i i "L
    M ¦ IJ
    ' i
    w*L
    i
    1
    I I
    »
    j j  •
    rf\ \ - ¦
    ' \ \ • \ '
    fi !/ i
    
    I
    
    ' [ * ~J i
    ' V. M :
    «^Ofi Mtw vxvtu »«CU. mtfytm wo
    U JTlfil cr *»C •n.tHilTTt »n»c» 4f
    C» «U»€AU SACC
    i
    2* r** nwx n
    • O wAi.jc formation and com-mma river sasai.t
    ittv-*o \-r i"inr:.ASii rtr?vr;nv miivhii v I'nwil'fT\tt»)V
    [3-82]
    

    -------
    SECTION 3.1.4
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (or SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    AUTHOR:
    (or INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:
    STUDY AREA:
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES:
    Low Temperature Geothermal
    Resource Management
    Lauren S. Forcella
    February, 1984
    Oregon
    USEPA Region X
    Not applicable
    This document was prepared by the
    Oregon Water Resources Department
    for the Oregon Department of
    Energy. Basic descriptions of the
    use of geothermal resources are
    provided along with discussions of
    effluent disposal and associated
    thermal degradation. Current
    regulatory status is discussed and
    recommendations concerning future
    statute changes are provided.
    [3-83]
    

    -------
    LOW TEMPERATURE GEOTHERMAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
    by
    Lauren S. Forcella
    OREGON WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
    for
    OREGON DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
    FEBRUARY 1984
    [3-34]
    

    -------
    TABLE OF CONTENTS
    INTRODUCTION	1
    METHODS OF HEATING AND HEAT EXTRACTION	4
    Ground Water Heat Pumps	4
    Hydronic Systems	7
    Heat Exchangers	7
    BINARY GENERATION FOR ELECTRICAL PRODUCTION	10
    ADMINISTRATIVE DELEGATION OF THERMAL FLUIDS	12
    POLICY FOR LOW TEMPERATURE EFFLUENT DISPOSAL	15
    WRD Rules for Effluent Disposal Systems	15
    DEQ Requirements	16
    STATUTORY PROTECTION FOR HEAT EXTRACTION WITHOUT WITHDRAWAL	17
    THERMAL DEGRADATION AND THERMAL INTERFERENCE	17
    Recommended Statute Changes	17
    Critical Ground Water Area Rules	17
    Interference Between DOGAMI and WRD	17
    GEOTHERMAL HEATING DISTRICTS	lfl
    Klamath Falls, A Case Study	19
    Oregon Alternative Energy Development Commission Recommendations	22
    Local Intervention in Reservoir Management	23
    WHAT DOES THE FUTURE HOLD?	25
    REFERENCES	27
    BIBLIOGRAPHY	28
    APPENDIX I Low Temperature Geothermal Administrative Rules
    APPENDIX II Recommended Statute Changes
    [3-35]
    

    -------
    NOTICE
    This guide i!> an account 01 work prepared under contract to the Oregon Department 01 Energy Neither
    the Deportment, nor any 01 its employees, contractors lubcontractors. or their employees, makes anv
    warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability to third parties, tor the content hereof. All
    opinions, findings, conclusions and recommendations expressed in this guide are those of the authors
    and do not necessarily reflect (he views of the Department, or its employees or contractors.
    [3-35]
    

    -------
    FIGURES
    Page
    Figure 1 Geological provinces of Oregon		2
    Figure 2 Ground water heat pump operation, heating mode		6
    Figure 3 Typical Klamath Falls well with downhole heat exchanger ....	9
    Figure 4 Rankine binary cycle power plant				11
    Figure 3 Methods of energy extraction with temperature		13
    TABLES
    Table 1	Estimated reservoir values and thermal energies of identified
    low temperature geothermal resources in Oregon		3
    13—37"]
    

    -------
    ABBREVIATIONS
    AEDC
    Alternate Energy Development Commission
    Btu
    British Thermal Unit
    COP
    Coefficient of Performance
    CRGD
    Citizens for Responsible Geothermal Development
    DEQ
    Department of Environmental Quality
    DOGAMI
    Department of Geology and Mineral Industries
    LBL
    Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
    NCSL
    National Conference of State Legislatures
    NPDES
    National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems
    OAR
    Oregon Administrative Rules
    ODOE
    Oregon Department of Energy
    OIT
    Oregon Institute of Technology
    ORS
    Oregon Revised Statutes
    USDOE
    United States Department of Energy
    uses
    United States Geologicai Survey
    WPCFP
    Water Pollution Control Facilities Permit
    WRD
    Water Resources Department
    [3—33
    

    -------
    INTRODUCTION
    Low temperature geothermal fluid is defined in OAR Chapter 690, Division 65 as any
    ground water used for its thermal characteristics that is encountered in a well with a
    bottom hole temperature less than 250°F (121°C). As such, low temperature geothermal
    resources are considered part of Oregon's ground water resources and are managed by the
    Oregon Water Resources Department (WRD). Use of ground water for its thermal
    properties is considered a beneficial use. With current interest tn renewable resources and
    improved technology in heat extraction, the thermal value of ground water at all
    temperatures has increased dramatically adding to the complexity of ground water
    management.
    s
    Higher than normal terrestrial heat flow in the Cascade Mountains, the Basin and Range,
    Columbia Plateau, Oregon Plateaus and the Snake River Plain Provinces give Oregon
    outstanding potential for use of geothermal resources. Geothermal energy in Oregon
    potentially is capable of displacing seven million barrels of fuel oil annually, comprising
    27 trillion Btus/year (903 MWe) of electrical energy and 66 trillion Btus/year (2208 MWt)
    of thermal energy. This is equivalent to the energy produced by six Boardman coal-fired
    plants (Geothermal Task Force, 1980). In a report for the Pacific Northwest Utilities
    Conference Committee and the Oregon Energy Facility Siting Council by the Oregon
    Department of Energy (ODOE), these figures have been updated to 6236 MW of total
    electrical and thermal power or 12 Boardman coal-fired plants (Brown, 1982).
    Geothermal resources most commonly are confined to intensely faulted areas where
    hydrogeologic conditions are favorable for deeply circulated thermal water to rise to land
    surface. Klamath Fails, Lakeview and Vale are examples of population centers built
    around active hydrothermal discharge areas. The direct use of geothermal energy for
    space and process heating in Klamath Falls is the largest application of its kind in the
    United States. Other areas with potential are the urban areas near the Cascade Mountains
    such as Portland, Salem, Eugene, Springfield, Oakridge and Hood River, or those of the
    Oregon Plateau such as Bend, Prineville, Madras and Burns. Other population centers near
    hydrothermal anomalies are The Dalles, Ontario and La Grande and many rural areas of
    southeastern Oregon. All these areas have the potential to implement district heating
    plans that could supply the locale with heat and/or electrical energy. Figure 1 and Table 1
    show the geological provinces of the state and the estimated heat available for different
    areas as determined by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (Reed, 1982).
    [3-39]
    

    -------
    ro
    Hood River
    The Dallas
    / Portland j
    /WILLAMETTE
    VALLEY
    Salem /
    LaGrande
    COLUMBIA PLATEAU
    Madras
    Prineville
    CASCADE
    MOUNTAINS
    Ontario
    Vale
    OREGON PLATEAUS
    Eugene «
    Springfielc
    Bend
    Oakridge
    COAST
    RANGE
    Burns
    SNAKE
    RIVER
    PLAIN
    KLAMATH
    MOUNTAINS
    BASIN AND RANGE
    Lakeview
    Klamath Falls
    Figure 1 Geological Provinces of Oregon
    W
    i
    to
    o
    

    -------
    Geologic
    C#etfw<««l irt*
    CiUfory
    »%«A *MA	*»«A	H»«A
    »»ur»#lf	rtitnoir	rvifn««r	(C«itlbl» Uteurct
    (#¦*<¦ lure irti	(Klclwti	rftaurt* bit« Uo"j|
    rt> it*')	i».i	no1* J)
    [mt for M yrl
    Ill1n ind K*nQt proline*
    lioiouo iriiw	
    CtlMtfl llitl		
    llmUi f«l)t*01*M C*o»«-
    CImoUI HUM-
    Vimr VilUp-<
    CitcM /!. l,'l.l la'
    M Serial •*
    <)	will IK* D'CI. '.Wfiuni M KOI
    wftl'tf*'? Vtfd d#0tft, 2 ««ll(
    («*C) M ¦ woo, <)0*C1 »S ¦ mo.
    I9S (II. NO OOS Jtl. i,»l im>.
    5) 20 torta^}	dootM to
    !tl a. TO 11), 14 00* •*/*.
    (4 f*
    230	H irtim.
    »0J	n irttm.
    13 0 Spring *** w"l (tO'-TCI, '01 ft).
    T4.0H •>/*. ^*t imt.
    M	(K'40'Ct a«d «llt
    « Orotfc 44U. TO 111, T-O.OM •*/•.
    4^*1 kai
    SI	»ll»	m dretft MU, TDJ |1».
    T<0 OM •?/•. ^*1 to*
    so tftiit tir-irci. m aott* «*u. nn in.
    T-O.OH «2/iv *^>1 km2.
    ?40 Ji iMtiw.
    l*.l ? tpnnvt m'CI «*4 1 -*11 (23'C1.
    ro-i ft), T4> 0OS of/i. yl fca2
    31 Wtllt I?4*-30"C1. LOB* »rt artttlift.
    OoetM «»Owt Jfl •, £< 001 w*/\,
    ^•1 ^
    17 0 Narfi««1 avH	I20*-)2*C1. fw
    droift 3*tJ. T05 m. lo oon m2/\t
    )2 Sor«*t« II0*-fl*C], 90«sl»ly •twc<«t«4
    •It* *l^>U«o*r«Ur* \j\lf. TW U),
    T«0.0« ^/». ^M.0* t«Z.
    SO Son aft IM «rC««*a «oil«
    M NOrt*»«*t »14» of N|r««r t<«».
    TW |M. T-0 OM •'/i. ^*1.01 k^.
    31 2 intm.
    011	«.l 2 -win 134* iM 40*C1, 21? • dNt'
    90t»lbl)r	«Uft • Hlf»«
    ^	W IM,
    1197.6 £<.0M Jt\.
    104
    24
    01?
    .ou
    .101
    041
    o.u
    QJ4
    Table I Estimated reservoir values and thermal energies of identified low temperature
    geothermai resources in Oregon (modified from Reed, 1982)
    3
    [3-91]
    

    -------
    The hotter the ground water, the more attractive it is for development of geothermal
    resources. However, all ground water contains stored heat. The specific heat of a
    substance is that quantity of heat required to increase the temperature of a unit weight of
    that substance 1°C. Water, the standard substance for defining that quantity of heat, has
    a specific heat of 1.0. With only a few exceptions, water has the highest specific heat of
    all compounds. Because of this, all aquifers are prime reservoirs of the earth's stored heat
    energy.
    Current technology in heat pumps enables heat to be extracted economically, in some
    areas, from water as low as 40°F (VC). Some designs of heat exchangers allow heat to be
    extracted with no withdrawal of water. Earth heat extraction via ground water resources
    may one day become the dominant method of space heating in the United States. In other
    a^plicationsj binary generators are making electrical generation possible from water as
    cool as 1S0°F (82"C). District heating systems have the potential to supply thermal and
    electrical energy to many customers with significant savings compared to conventional
    sources of heat and electricity. With ground water now commonly used as a heat source,
    the diversity of ground water use is compounded. This emphasizes the public policy issue
    of adequate protection and management for future generations.
    METHODS OF HEATING AND HEAT EXTRACTION
    Ground Water Heat Pumps:
    A heat pump is generally any system that uses refrigeration equipment to provide space
    heating or cooling. Most familiar is the air-to-air heat pump used in many residential,
    commercial and industrial buildings. In these systems, air is used both as heat source and
    heat sink. With the variability of air temperature and its seasonal fluctuations, efficiency
    drops during temperature extremes. When heating is required in winter* the cold outside
    air can provide little heat energy. The reverse is true in summer when cooling is
    required. However, because of water's high specific heat and the insulating effect of
    rocks and soil, ground water temperatures vary little throughout the year. This constancy
    makes ground water effective as a heat source in winter when it is warmer than mean air
    temperatures and as a heat sink in summer when it is cooler than mean air temperatures.
    Recent designs of ground water source heat pumps make it economical in some areas to
    extract heat from ground water with temperatures as low as 40°F (4*C).
    u
    [3-92]
    

    -------
    During the heating cycle, the ground water source heat pump works by using heat from
    ground water to evaporate freon (or other low-boiling point refrigerants). The gaseous
    freon is then circulated through a compressor to the condensor side of the heat exchanger
    coil where air is blown over the coil. The air cools the gaseous freon, condensing it to a
    liquid which releases heat to the area to be heated. The liquid freon then recirculates to
    the evaporator side of the heat exchanger where heat from the ground water is again
    absorbed causing the freon to vaporize. The gaseous freon repeats the circulation pattern
    by condensing and releasing the absorbed heat to the air. In the process, the ground water
    is cooled and the air is warmed. This describes the water-to-air heat pump, however
    water-to-water heating is also common.
    This repeating process of evaporation, compression, condensation and expansion in the
    heat pump is known as the Carnot cycle. See Figure 2. The process is reversed for space
    cooling.
    The ratio of thermal output (Btu/hr) to electrical input (kWh) is a measure of system
    efficiency or coefficient of performance (COP). COPs of recently manufactured ground
    water heat pumps range from about 2.5 to 5, depending on water temperature and system
    design. The ground water heat pump needs about 2.5 gallons of water per minute for
    12,000 Btus/hour of heat extraction. Thus, during demand time the average home needs
    about 5 to 12 gallons of water per minute, depending on the size of the house and the air
    and ground water temperatures.
    Potential problems for ground water heat pumps are the possibility of corrosion, scaling or
    iron bacteria growth fouling the system. Chemical treatment of poor quality ground
    water can often prevent such problems. Other problems are finding a sustainable source
    of ground water and discharging the effluent in conformance with government standards.
    As described in a later section, discharging the effluent to waste is allowable in many
    situations, but is considered by WRD to be a "nonstandard" method of effluent disposal.
    Preferably, the ground water is consumed after heat is exchanged or is reinjected to the
    same or a suitable aquifer. This insures longevity of supply and is a responsible approach
    to a sustainable energy future.
    5
    [3-93J
    

    -------
    From Supply Well
    Heated Air or Water
    Compressor
    Evaporator ^
    Condenser
    Expansion Valve
    To Reinjection Well	Air or Water
    to be Heated
    Figure 2 Ground water heat pump operation, heating mode
    6
    [3-94]
    

    -------
    Estimates by ODOE indicate that about five applications for tax credits on ground water
    heat pumps currently are submitted each month. Most of these are being installed in the
    Willamette" VaJley (Personal Communication, David Brown, 1983). Tax credits are offered
    for systems with a COP of at least three for space heating and a COP of at least two for
    water heating.
    To operate these heat pumps, both "standard" and "nonstandard" disposal systems are
    being used. The effluent is not contaminated in any way by the typical heat pump system.
    However, the water temperature is altered by 5 to 20°F (3 to 11°C). This opens the
    potential for thermal degradation of aquifers, especially when reinjection wells are
    significantly dense or the volume of reinjected effluent is significantly large. Monitoring
    has begun in some parts of the nation to study effects of thermal pollution resulting from
    reinjected heat pump effluent on different aquifer types. To date, Oregon has no such
    monitoring, although it is planned.
    Hydronic Heating Systems?
    Hydronic heat emitting systems such as radiant panels, finned-tube baseboard convector
    units and forced-air systems are commonly used for space conditioning. They are most
    efficient when thermal fluids can be used directly. However, thermal fluids often contain
    chemical impurities that result in scaling or corrosion to the heat emitting equipment.
    Because of this, a heat exchanger or heat pump is often used to heat a benign secondary
    fluid. The heated secondary fluid is then circulated through the distribution system and
    reheated by the source thermal fluid in a closed loop arrangement.
    Heat Exchangers:
    Downhole Heat Exchanger — Downhole heat exchangers, sometimes known as closed loop
    earth-coupled systems, work by extracting heat from a well without withdrawal of water.
    The downhole heat exchanger functions by circulating a secondary fluid through a closed
    U-shaped conduit placed in a well. The secondary fluid extracts heat from the well. In
    most cases the fluid is circulated by a thermostatically controlled in-line pump. The
    heated working fluid is then piped to some type of convective, radiant and/or forced-air
    heat distribution unit. In the case of low temperature, the heated fluid may be used in a
    heat pump.
    7
    [3-95]
    

    -------
    Well depth requirements are a function of water temperature, depth to water, seasonal
    fluctuations in water level, and heating or cooling requirements.
    Closed loop systems are common in Klamath Falls and to a lesser extent in La Grande,
    Lakeview and Vale. More than *»0Q such downhole heat exchangers are used for space
    heating and hot water in Klamath Fails. Most are installed in the hot well area of the city
    where ground water temperatures range from 190 to 235°F (87 to 113°C). With
    temperatures this high, cool city water is used as the working fluid. In most cases, no
    circulating pump is necessary because natural convection circulates the city water. For
    the Klamath Falls system, each foot of coil will yield about 1500 Btus/hour (Lund, et alM
    1978). Figure 3 shows a typical Klamath Falls well equipped with a downhole heat
    exchanger.
    In Klamath Falls, most wells are constructed to commingle water from two or more
    permeable hot aquifers. Apparently, the convection cell that is established within the
    borehole enhances the heat exchange process. It is unknown what the long-term effect of
    this commingling has been or will be. Additionally, the heat exchangers are removing
    stored heat from the reservoir. Under contract with ODOE, WRD established a network
    of wells in 1982 to monitor long-term effects of heat removal and commingling in the
    dense hot well area of Klamath Falls.
    The closed loop or downhole heat exchanger is not as efficient as the ground water source
    heat pump. However, not all aquifers have ample supply and recharge capacity to justify
    withdrawal of water for heating and not all users can afford to reinject the effluent
    created by a ground water source heat pump. Another advantage of the downhole heat
    exchanger is that ground water quality or quantity is of no importance. As the cost of
    conventionally produced heat rises, so will the popularity of the downhole heat exchanger.
    Plate Heat Exchanger — The plate heat exchanger consists of a series of plates clamped
    together in a frame. Commonly the plates are made of stainless steel, titanium or brass.
    The thermal and secondary fluids move through the plates in single-pass counter flow
    providing efficient exchange. The plates dismantle easily for cleaning. Additional plates
    can be added in series to increase heating capacity. This type of heat exchanger is readily
    available for applications of all sizes.
    S
    [3-961
    

    -------
    To house
    Downhole heat exchanger
    t.O
    Cold ground water zone
    Casing
    Bore hole surface
    Water
    Packing for sealing
    25 m
    Perforations
    50 m
    Hot water zone
    *a Hot water zone
    75 rri
    Mud leg on coil
    Typical downhole heat exchanger instate ton
    (not to scale)
    Figure 3 Typical Klamath Falls well with downhole heat exchanger (Justus, 1980)
    [3-97]
    9
    

    -------
    Shell-and-Tube Heat Exchanger — This very common heat exchanger consists of a series
    of tubes enclosed by shells. The tubes carry the source thermal fluid and the shells, the
    secondary fluid. The tubes are designed for relative ease of cleaning. Shell-and-tube
    exchangers can be used in series for greater heating capacity. This type of heat
    exchanger is generally used in large commercial and industrial applications.
    BINARY GENERATION FOR ELECTRICAL PRODUCTION
    The Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA) passed by Congress in 1978,
    guarantees a market for power produced from small (80 MW or less per plant), non-utility
    plants that use renewable resources. Electrical power generation using the organic
    Rankine cycle binary generator currently is the accepted technology lor low temperature
    geothermal resources. Organic Rankine cycle binary generators are designed to produce
    electricity using heat from water in the range of 180 to 50G°F (82 to 260°C). The system
    works by using geothermal water to vaporize a working fluid, usually a fluorocarbon, with
    a boiling point suitable to the range of temperatures found in the heating and cooling
    waters. During the Rankine cycle, the vaporized working fluid is expanded through a
    turbine to generate electricity. The working fluid is then cooled and condensed by heat
    exchange with cool water and/or air. Finally, a pump circulates the condensed fluid back
    through the evaporator and the turbine. See Figure More energy is released by the
    expansion of vapor through the turbine than is required to circulate and condense the
    working fluid, operate the cooling system and pump the geothermal fluid. The result is
    net production of electricity.
    These systems are most effectively operated as a closed system with the geothermal
    water pumped out of a production well, passed through the binary generator, and
    reinjected back into the reservoir via a return well. This system eliminates problems
    associated with geothermal gas emissions, effluent disposal, land subsidence and water
    level decline. However, the plume of reinjected water potentially could cool the
    production area, change the aquifer properties by deposition of secondary minerals, or
    interfere with other uses of ground water.
    10
    [3-98]"
    

    -------
    Binary Cycle Power Plant
    Generator
    Air & water
    vaoor
    ¦¦¦¦¦ Turtoine
    X.
    Cooling tower
    v*4-^ Wjyr	1 f'
    Geoffierma) zone
    Figure 4 Binary cycle power plant (Justus, 1980)
    11
    [3-99]
    

    -------
    Cooling the working fluid can be attained by using either wet or dry cooling, or a
    combination. If cool water is available, a cooling tower or pond is the least expensive
    cooling method. However, wet cooling presents problems with waste water disposal and
    the cooling tower plume may impair visibility, cause icing or be visually objectionable.
    Geothermal fluid with temperatures of 130°F (82°C) are associated with many of the
    geothermal anomalies shown m Figure 1. Currently, it is not economically feasible to
    develop 180"F water and sell electricity produced by the Rankine method unless the hot
    water is an industrial by-product that normally was discharged to waste, or the hot water
    is put to direct application after power generation. As the price of electricity rises or as
    exploration reveals hotter geothermal resources, use of Rankine binary generators will
    increase. The relatively low cost and modular design makes them attractive investments.
    Currently, a 213°F (100oC) well in Lakeview is equipped with six Rankine binary
    turbo-generators that have successfully been tested. Others are planned for Vale.
    Long-term testing will be necessary to assess aquifer response to sustained pumping and
    reinjection and to determine impact on other nearby uses of ground water.
    Figure 5 shows various methods of energy extraction with temperature.
    ADMINISTRATIVE DELEGATION OF THERMAL FLUIDS
    Geothermal fluid in Oregon is defined as any fluid derived from a process designed to
    extract heat from a ground water or geothermal resource ("Oregon Interagency
    Geothermal Fluid Report", 1978). Geothermal fluids are legislatively divided into two
    administrative categories on the basis of temperature. Thermal fluids 250#F (120°C) or
    hotter are considered a portion of the surface or mineral estate of the property and are
    regulated by the Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI). Fluids less
    than 250°F are considered ground water resources which are the property of the public
    trust and are regulated by WRD.
    Drilling standards are a function of both fluid temperature and well depth. Wells which
    seek thermal fluids 250°F or hotter and/or are 2000 feet or more in depth must be drilled
    under DOGAMI requirements. Wells intended to produce ground water resources cooler
    than 250°F that are shallower than 2000 feet deep must be drilled under the requirements
    of WRD.
    12
    [3-100]"
    

    -------
    Heat Exchangers
    (surface and downhole)
    Absorption Refrigeration
    Chillers
    Vapor Compression
    Chillers
    Binary Generation
    Direct Use
    Heat Pumps (heating and cooling)
    Baseboard Convectors
    Forced Air Hot Water Coils
    Radiant Panels
    Figure 5 Methods of energy extraction with temperature (modified from Justus, I960)
    

    -------
    The Legislative division on the basis of temperature has proven to be an adequate working
    policy. However, the 2000-foot depth division has been somewhat controversial. The
    division is based upon the intended use of the well and could be cumbersome if ground
    water resources are desired from wells greater than 2000 feet deep. However, to insure
    public safety, specific casing and blow-out prevention requirements should exist for deep
    wells regardless of their intended use. DOGAMI has such specific construction rules for
    deep wells that protect against encountering natural gas and/or geothermal fluids at
    unknown subsurface pressures.
    Water is so rarely sought from depths greater than 2000 feet that there have been no
    previous administrative problems with the depth division. However, should ground water
    be desired from this depth, perhaps DOGAMI and WRD should work together to require
    appropriate construction standards with respect to the subsurface geology in the area of
    the well. Depending on the WRD/DOGAM1 decision, the drilling requirements for the
    ground water well could be as for oil and gas wells (DOGAMI ORS Chapter 520), as for
    geothermal wells (DOGAMI ORS Chapter 522), or as for ground water wells (WRD ORS
    Chapter 537). This type of joint management over deep ground water well drilling would
    insure public safety during drilling of deep wells regardless of the intent of the well.
    In Oregon, ground water appropriation is statutorily protected on the basis of date of
    priority. If a developer cannot anticipate what resource temperature may be encountered,
    simultaneous applications to DOGAMI and WRD would ensure the earliest possible priority
    date. Otherwise, if application is first made to DOGAMI and the resource is less than
    25Q°F, a new water right priority date is established when application is rnade to WRD.
    Currently, there are no provisions for a transfer between WRD and DOGAMI with
    retention of the original priority date.
    If a well that initially contained fluid 250"F or hotter, cools to a temperature less than
    250°F, DOGAMI and WRD will consult with the well owner and decide which agency is
    responsible for the well. This process is described in CR5 522.025. If fluid cooler than
    250aF rises to 250°F or hotter, the problem is addressed in a similar manner in ORS
    537.090. Both these statutes apply to wells in all stages of construction and completion.
    It
    [3-102]
    

    -------
    POLICY FOR LOW TEMPERATURE GEOTHERMAL WELLS AND
    EFFLUENT DI5POSAL SYSTEMS
    Pursuant to House Joint Resolution 30, the "Oregon Interagency Geothermal Fluid Report"
    was prepared in October J 978. Representatives of WRD, DOGAMI, ODOE and the
    Department of EnvironmentaJ Quality (DEQ) formed a committee to develop consistent
    policies regarding disposal of geothermal fluids. The main considerations for disposal are
    conservation of the resource and protection of surface and ground water for all
    recognizable and potential beneficial uses.
    WRD Rules for Effluent Disposal Systems;
    In December 1982, WRD adopted Oregon Administrative Rules in Chapter 690, Division 65
    "Standards and Procedures for Low Temperature Geothermal Wells and Effluent Disposal
    Systems". The rules cite well construction standards for low temperature geothermal
    wells and reinjectton wells that supplement WRD well construction standards in OAR
    690-10-005 to 690-10-045 and 690-60-005 to 690-63-045. The new rules address separation
    distances between supply and reinjection wells using the same aquifer and cite standards
    for pump testing of supply and reinjection wells.
    Users planning to reinject may be required to provide WRD and DEQ with a chemical
    analysis of the water in the producing aquifer, the water to be reinjected, and the water
    in the receiving zone of the return well. These measures help prevent ground water
    contamination, thermal degradation or significant changes in aquifer properties. A copy of
    the rules is included as Appendix I.
    The rules use a dual classification system for standard and nonstandard effluent disposal.
    Standard effluent disposal systems are those in which: 1) no contaminants are added to the
    geothermal fluid and the effluent is put to a secondary beneficial use; or 2) no
    contaminants are added to the geothermal fluid and the effluent is returned to the
    producing, or suitable aquifer and there are no other problems or special conditions
    determined by WRD.
    Nonstandard effluent disposal systems are those in which: 1) any portion of the effluent is
    disposed of in a nonbeneficial manner (including for example, disposal to a storm sewer,
    15
    [3-103]
    

    -------
    drainage hole, land surface or any surface water body); 2) the effluent contains contaminants
    that have been added to the geothermal fluid; 3) the effluent is reinjected to an "unsuitable"
    aquifer (in most cases this will not be allowed); or 4) there are any other special conditions
    or potential problems such as instability of near-surface earth materials, leakage of effluent
    downslope, alteration of geothermal characteristics, etc.
    A low temperature geothermal well is defined in OAR 690, Division 65 as any well with a
    bottom hole temperature less than 250°F that is constructed or used for the thermal
    properties of the fluid encountered. As such, the use of ground water for its thermal
    properties is beneficial but nonconsumptive. That is the reason for dual classification of
    effluent disposal systems. If a user reinjects the effluent to a suitable aquifer or uses it for
    secondary beneficial consumptive purposes, the water right for that user will be considered
    standard. As such, the right will be protected on the basis of priority date against all future
    ground water appropriations. However, if after heat extraction, the effluent is disposed of in
    any nonstandard manner, the water right will only be protected against those of subsequent
    users who also utilize a nonstandard disposal system. Thus, it will be subsequent in priority
    to future beneficial consumptive ground water rights.
    Effluent disposal systems may change from nonstandard to standard or vice versa, or may be
    standard during irrigation season and nonstandard the remainder of the year. Regardless of
    changes, the date of priority remains the same. If ground water regulation is needed m an
    area, effluent disposal systems will be classified according to their status at that time and
    water rights will be protected accordingly. As part of the regulation, a deadline may be
    imposed requiring all disposal systems to be made standard.
    DEQ Requirements:
    Reinjection — A Water Pollution Control Facilities (WPCF) Permit is required for
    subsurface effluent disposal when: I) reinjection is to a different aquifer than the producing
    aquifer; 2) the receiving aquifer is of better quality than the producing aquifer and a
    beneficial use potentially may be impaired; or 3) chemicals are added to the effluent.
    However, when a reinjection system is classified as standard by WRD, DEQ likely will waive
    its WPCF Permit requirements.
    Land Surface Effluent Disposal — Land disposal of effluent also requires a WPCF Permit.
    However, if the primary purpose of applying the geothermal fluid effluent to the land is for
    beneficial agricultural purposes (and the fluid is of such a quality as to not endanger flora or
    ground water), no WPCF Permit will be required. With the recent increase in ground water
    use for domestic heating, DEQ currently is considering a general WPCF Permit to
    16
    

    -------
    address uncontaminated, low-volume effluent disposal to land surface. This general permit
    probably will not involve fees.
    Effluent Disposal To Surface Water -- DEQ requires a National Pollutant Discharge
    Elimination Systems (NPDES) Permit for any discharge of pollutants, including heat, to
    surface waters of the State. In most cases, large heat discharges require cooling prior to
    discharge. Small discharges of heat are evaluated on a case-by-case basis. DEQ now issues a
    general NPDES Permit that addresses uncontaminated, low-volume effluent disposal of
    compatible temperature to a surface water body. There is no fee.
    PROTECTION FOR HEAT EXTRACTION WITHOUT WITHDRAWAL
    Use of ground water for its thermal properties is considered a commercial/industrial use. As
    such, a ground water permit from WRD is required for appropriation of 5000 or more gailons
    per day. The 1983 Legislature amended ORS 537.5^5 to protect owners of downhole heat
    exchangers even though there is no withdrawal of water. Non-extractive use of ground
    water for its thermal properties formally is exempt from the requirement to file for water
    rights. The use of the heat, however, automatically constitutes a right to the use of ground
    water equal to that established by a ground water right certificate. Such protection is
    statutorily provided for any use of ground water specifically exempt from the requirement
    to file for water rights.
    THERMAL DEGRADATION AND THERMAL INTERFERENCE
    Recommended Statute Changes:
    Legislative changes to provide resource management and protection for low temperature
    geothermal users will likely be proposed by WRD during the 1985 Session. Currently, there is
    no clear legal protection against thermal degradation or thermal interference between
    wells. Appendix II includes portions of ORS Chapter 537 "Appropriation of Water Generally"
    and cites preliminary ideas for amendment to protect beneficial use of water for its thermal
    properties.
    Critical Ground Water Area Rules;
    In March 1983, rules were adopted in OAR Chapter 690, Division 10 "Initiation of Proceeding
    for Determination of a Critical Ground Water Area". With implementation of statutory
    changes recommended in Appendix II, the proposed critical area rules would then also apply
    to areas suffering thermal degradation or thermal interference.
    17	[3-105]
    

    -------
    In an area undergoing WRD management of ground water decline or non-thermal
    interference, appropriators who wish to continue extracting heat may be required, within a
    certain time period, to only use standard effluent disposal systems.
    Interference Between DOGAMI and WRD:
    When interference is noted between ground water appropriators governed by WRD and
    geothermal appropriators governed by DOGAMI, ORS 537.095 mandates that DOGAMI and
    WRD shall work cooperatively to resolve the conflict and develop a cooperative
    management program for the area. Goals considered for the cooperative agreement shall be:
    1) achieving the most beneficjal use of the water and heat resources; 2) allowing all existing
    users of the resource to continue to use those resources to the greatest extent possible; and
    3) insuring that the public interest in efficient use of water and heat resources is protected.
    It is recommended that local officials help develop the management plan so that local
    interests are not overlooked.
    When an application to appropriate ground water discloses possible interference with heat
    extraction from a well hotter than 250°F, ORS 537.620 allows WRD to: I) approve the
    application; 2) impose conditions on the application; 3) reject the application after a hearing;
    or <0 initiate proceedings for the determination of a critical ground water area.
    GEOTHERMAL HEATING DISTRICTS
    In areas of localized hydrothermal discharge where use of geothermal resources is
    intensified, comprehensive reservoir assessment and management are necessary if all ground
    water uses are to be protected and used to their maximum beneficial capacity. Population
    centers near geothermal discharge areas have tremendous potential to use the resource.
    Hydrothermal systems often are complex and resource assessment and management is
    difficult without local participation.
    Though statewide ground water resource management is predominantly WRD's responsibility,
    Oregon law allows cities, counties or private corporations to operate a geothermal heat
    distribution system to consumers much as a municipal water district supplies water. This
    authority is described in ORS Chapter 523 "Geothermal Heating Districts". This statute is
    the first of its kind in the nation. It authorizes districts to: 1) contract for services; 2) hold
    and transfer real property; 3) sue and be sued; *0 form cooperative agreements; 5) issue
    general obligation, revenue or refunding bonds; 6) exercise the power of eminent domain; 7)
    18
    [3-106
    

    -------
    levy special assessment taxes; 8) levy special ad-valorem taxes; and 9) provide supplemental
    energy from non-geothermal sources in emergencies.
    Under ORS 523, an incorporated city is empowered to provide geothermal heating district
    services by a home rule charter or by a vote of the people when a home rule charter does
    not exist.
    Currently, there are no established geothermal heating districts in Oregon. Plans for a
    city-operated geothermal heating district in Klamath Falls have existed for some time. The
    idea is also being considered in Lakeview and Vale.
    Klamath Falls, A Case Study:
    Of the geothermal areas in Oregon, Klamath Falls has received the most attention.
    Hydrogeologic studies and socio-political conflicts make it an important case study of
    problems associated with low temperature geothermal reservoir assessment and
    management.
    fn January 1977, formation of a city-operated geothermal heating district in Klamath Falls
    was proposed. Construction of Phase I of the heating system began in 1979. Phase 1,
    requiring 700 gpm of 220°F (10^'C) geothermal fluid, is designed to supply space heating and
    hot water to I'f government office buildings in the downtown area and later to 127 homes in
    two low-income residential areas. This was planned as the first of six phases that initially
    would supply heat to the central business district and later would expand to serve the entire
    urban area of approximately 20 square miles and 35,000 persons.
    Phase 1 was completed in Fall 1982. Two production wells and one remjection well were
    completed and the distribution system was installed. Having a home rule charter, the City
    did not need a charter amendment to authorize formation of the geothermal heating
    district. However, to reinforce district formation, the City offered citizens a choice to vote
    on a charter amendment as well. During a special election in March 1982, voters, apparently
    worried about impacts to the aquifer, rejected the charter amendment.
    Three months later, an initiative filed by Citizens for Responsible Geothermal Development
    (CRGD), was approved by voters. The decision obstructs use of the completed geothermal
    heating system. This ordinance prevents withdrawal of thermal waters unless the water,
    undiminished in volume, is returned to the same well.
    19
    [3-107i
    

    -------
    The initiative was challenged by WRD in the Klamath County Circuit Court. Because the
    initiative virtually inhibits use of the geothermal resource except through downhole heat
    exchange (where there is no withdrawal of water), WRD claimed that the initiative, in
    essence, regulates the appropriation of ground water resources. WRD contended that such
    local regulation is an infringement of WRD's exclusive statutory authority to manage ground
    water. However, the initiative was upheld by Circuit Court on the basis that the State has
    not preempted local governments from adopting regulations and the local ordinance did not
    conflict with any existing state regulations pertaining to ground water resources. WRD has
    taken the case before the Oregon Court of Appeals. A judgement is expected in 1984.
    A major concern to the Klamath Falls City Council is the outcome of the WRD appeal of the
    Circuit Court decision on the citizen initiative. While awaiting a decision, positive steps
    have been taken to resolve the conflict among independent citizens, City Council and
    CRGD. In January 1983, the Klamath County Chamber of Commerce began organizing a
    long-term test of the city heating system.
    A $150,000 grant from the U.S. Department of Energy (USDOE) funded several scientific
    research groups to conduct an eight-week aquifer and tracer test of the Klamath Fails
    geothermal reservoir. Primary investigator and coordinator for the testing program was
    Edward Sammel of the USGS. Sammel has long stressed the need for a sustained aquifer
    test of the production and reinjection system to accurately determine how Phase 1 will
    affect the geothermal reservoir. Playing the key role in aquifer test analysis were Sally
    Benson and Dr. Norman Goldstein of IBL. Also as part of the testing program, Alfred
    Truesdell of the USGS, sampled waters for chemical and isotopic analyses; Dr. John
    Gudmundsson of Stanford University, directed tracer studies to help indicate ground water
    flow paths and velocities; Drs. Paul Lineau and Gene Culver of the Geo-Heat Center at OIT,
    provided logistical support. Local coordinators of monitoring and data collection were Susan
    Swanson and Dennis Long of D.C. Long Energyinan, Inc., Klamath Falls. Volunteer data
    gathering was coordinated by Bud and Deborah Hart of CRGD.
    20
    [3-103]
    

    -------
    The eight-week aquifer test began July 5, 1983, with a pumping rate of 720 gpm from the
    900-foot deep City Well 2. On July 27, approximately three weeks into the test, reinjection
    began into the Museum Well. Reinjection continued for almost one month until pump shutoff
    on August 2it, 1983. Preliminary analysis indicates that with suitable reinjection, the
    reservoir may be capable of sustained yields at greater pumping rates than tested. In
    response to pumping, City Well 2 had a maximum drawdown of 7.5 feet. The nearest monitor
    well, located 1 20 feet away, had 4.66 feet of drawdown. These measurments were taken at
    the end of the non-remjection phase of pumping. After reinjection began, water levels began
    to recover. After two weeks of reinjection, water levels appeared to stabilize as the
    withdrawal and reinjection process equilibrated (Personal Communication, Benson, 1983). A
    final report by Sammel and others will be made public in 1984.
    Final results from the 1983 aquifer test will provide long-awaited information to the people
    of Klamath Fails. Data from this eight-week test should allow long-term effects of
    withdrawal and reinjection to be accurately predicted. This scientific information will help
    guide Klamath Falls residents in evaluating options for the future of the geothermal
    resource and Phase I of the heating system. The cooperation by diverse groups all over
    Klamath Falls is an unprecedented recognition of the importance of wise stewardship of
    local renewable resources through community action.
    Klamath Falls is an example of a city where the disparate uses of ground water and a
    historical lack of technical understanding have resulted in conflicts. Clearly, a locale in
    which residents rely heavily on geothermal resources for much of their energy needs
    deserves comprehensive reservoir management. Comprehensive management requires
    thorough technical understanding. The City of Klamath Falls recognized this need. The City
    was concerned that the small staff at WRD could not give reservoir evaluation and
    management the attention it could receive through local authority. With ODOE funding in
    1980, The City contracted with Eliot Allen and Associates to author the "Preliminary Model
    Ordinance for Municipal Geothermal District Heating and Reservoir Management". In
    addition to presenting a comprehensive administrative scheme, the ordinance presents a
    case for joint management of the geothermal reservoir between WRD and geothermal
    heating districts. The ordinance has been studied by the University of Oregon Bureau of
    Government Research, the Earl Warren Legal Institute of Berkeley, California, the U.S.
    Conference of Mayors in Washington, DC, and the National Conference of State
    Legislatures, and is considered a prototype for planning in states where geothermal
    resources exist. The State of Colorado has adopted legislation that allows similar joint state
    and local management of geothermal heating districts.
    21
    [3-109]-
    

    -------
    Oregon Alternate Energy Development Commission Recommendations:
    In September 1980, the Oregon Alternate Energy Development Commission submitted final
    recommendations to Governor Atiyeh. The purpose of the report was to promote the
    development of renewable resources by recommending mitigating legislation and policy to
    accelerate geothermal energy development.
    Recommendation suggests a program be developed allowing geothermal heating districts
    to assist WRD with reservoir management plans. Under the plan, WRD would specify
    standards that the district would be required to meet. The district would then prepare a
    management plan subject to WRD conditioning and approval. The program would ensure
    that all water development within the district would promote maximum local benefits and
    be consistent with state water policy (Oregon Alternate Energy Development Commission,
    1980).
    Recommendation 45 suggests a program whereby geothermal heating districts are informed
    by WRD and DOGAM! of drilling notices in the vicinity of the district. This would ensure
    that the district would have notification of action that potentially could affect the resource
    (Oregon Alternate Energy Development Commission, 1980).
    Both recommendations were adopted by Governor Atiyeh and presented to the 1981
    Legislature. However, the Legislature did not approve funding to implement
    Recommendation Uk; Though not a complete solution, Recommendation is addressed by
    WRD in a weekly news release to all county planning divisions and various state agencies, as
    well as by fee to any interested parties. The news release is a list of applications made to
    WRD to use water. Each entry contains information regarding the source, type, amount and
    place of water use, in addition to the applicant's name and mailing address, the application
    number and date of receipt. Unfortunately, project construction often begins prior to
    making application to WRD. When a geothermal heating district becomes established this
    procedure could be restructured to notify the district prior to project construction.
    22
    [3-110]
    

    -------
    Local Cooperation in Reservoir Management:
    Currently, geothermal heating districts do not have formal reservoir management powers.
    This point, however, is under debate in the Oregon Court of Appeals concerning the Klamath
    Falls ordinance. There is no preemption by WRD to local ordinances that do not attempt to
    regulate appropriation of ground water. For instance, a local ordinance can be adopted
    requiring residents to register information about their well and water uses. The ordinance
    could also specify notification and fee requirements before the well is constructed. Such a
    comprehensive county ordinance is now in effect in Lane County under Lane Code, Chapter
    9. An ordinance is also in effect in Josephine County. Benton County has special pump test
    requirements.
    A geothermal heating district obviously needs to have comprehensive resource assessment in
    order to implement a sustainable heating system plan. The district also needs to know the
    nature and extent of all other uses of the reservoir. Without this knowledge it would be
    impossible to determine potential interferences between water users or to determine the
    limit of stress the reservoir could sustain with time. In the vicinity of a geothermal heating
    district, this kind of assessment would require much time and expertise and would need to be
    on-going throughout the life of the district. To accomplish this, a geothermal heating
    district would inevitably need a registration system for wells and water uses and would also
    need a resident hydrogeologist.
    Despite a lack of formal management powers there are ways in which a heating district can
    promote or influence some reservoir management decisions by WRD. For instance, if an
    application to appropriate ground water indicated potential to adversely impact present uses
    of ground water in the district, the district could formally protest the application at WRD.
    The district would be given the opportunity to present evidence in a contested case hearing
    as to why the permit should not be issued. After examination of all evidence submitted in
    such a hearing, WRD could exercise its options under ORS 537.620 and condition, deny or
    approve the permit.
    If a district believed that part or all of the hydrogeologic system was sensitive to
    developmental impacts, it could petition WRD to declare a critical ground water area. While
    WRD did an investigation, district experts could share their data and interpretation of the
    reservoir and aid WR D in whatever management plan ensued.
    23
    13—11T] ,
    

    -------
    This existing structure for participation in management unfortunately invites adversarial
    positioning between WRD and the geothermal heating district. This structure has the
    potential to.be costly and inefficient.
    Colorado recently added Article 90.5 "Geothermal Resources" to Title 37, Colorado
    Revised Statutes. Article 90.5 recognizes the use of water as a material medium from
    which heat can be extracted. As such, all applications to appropriate ground water in
    order to utilize its heat energy are considered applications to appropriate geothermal
    fluid. "Geothermal Management Districts" are addressed in the article under Colorado
    Revised Statutes 37-90.5-108. The statute follows:
    37-90.5-108. Geothermal management districts.
    1)	The State Engineer may adopt procedures under which geothermal
    management districts may be established. In such districts, the State
    Engineer has the authority to:
    a)	control well-spacing and production rates;
    b)	control the quantity of geothermal fluid extracted from geothermal
    resources by such methods and procedures as he' deems appropriate,
    including requirements to reinject;
    c)	adopt a comprehensive plan for the most efficient use of geothermal
    resources, guided by the principles of equitable apportionment,
    maximum economic recovery and prevention of waste.
    2)	The State Engineer may delegate some or ail of his authority under this
    section to a geothermal management district upon finding that the district
    has adequate organization and capability to administer an acceptable
    management plan.
    This addition to Colorado Law was written by Kenneth Wonstolen and was adopted under
    Senate Bill 390 in May 1983 (Personal Communication, Wonstolen, 1983). The bill was
    written by Wonstolen while on an ad hoc committee in Colorado comprised of the Public
    Utilities Commissioner, the State Engineer, the National Conference of State
    Legislatures (NCSL) and others. Wonstolen formerly worked with the NCSL developing
    policy options regarding geothermal fluid management for the Oregon Legislature from
    197S through 1981.
    2k
    

    -------
    The Colorado statute regarding geothermal management districts was controversial
    (Personal Communication, Kenneth Wonstolen, 1983). However, the local powers are at
    the discretron of the State. A plan such as this was proposed in the Eliot Allen and
    Associates' "Preliminary Model Ordinance for Geothermal Heating Districts and Reservoir
    Management" in 1980. Similar legislation was recommended for Oregon by the Alternate
    Energy Development Commission in 1980 and adopted by Governor Atiyeh in 1981.
    Though no geothermal heating districts presently exist, the idea deserves continued
    consideration in light of the increasing economic need for district heating, energy
    independence and sustainable reservoir management. As envisioned in the Allen model,
    the idea is quite simple;
    *	First, the district would develop a reservoir management plan. The plan would
    have to be based on comprehensive technical assessment of the resource. The
    plan would have to take into consideration current and potential uses of ground
    water in the district. The plan would be subject to approval and/or changes by
    WRD.
    *	Following WRD approval of the plan, the district would then be empowered by
    WRD to implement the plan. The district's hydrogeologist and other experts
    would work closely with WRD to see that the plan is implemented properly.
    *	If problems or conflicts arise in the plan itself or in the implementation of the
    plan, the district would refer the matter to WRD for ultimate disposition.
    As such, the public policy issue of low temperature geothermal reservoir management
    becomes the mutual goal of WRD and the district.
    WHAT DOES THE FUTURE HOLD?
    As development of low temperature geothermal resources gains popularity, it adds to the
    complexity of ground water management. State-of-the-art concepts in low temperature
    heat extraction are rapidly accelerating. Water at 213*F (100°C) is producing electricity
    using a binary generation method in Lakeview. Similar ventures are envisioned in Vale.
    Additionally, heat pump technology now makes it economically attractive to extract heat
    from the cool ground waters of the Willamette Valley and elsewhere.
    Ground water reservoirs now supply not only domestic, stock, fire protection, irrigation,
    commercial and industrial needs, but also provide heat and electricity. Space heating and
    cooling, greenhouse horticulture, food drying, aquaculture and myriad other
    commercial/industrial uses are becoming common.
    25
    [3-113]
    

    -------
    Near areas of concentrated hydrothermal discharge, district heating has the potential to
    serve many people with a minimum of expense, both in terms of capital outlay and
    long-term sustainability of the resource. Comprehensive resource assessment is therefore
    vital to proper management. In the vicinity of a geothermal heating district, long-term
    impacts to the reservoir in terms of reinjection, thermal degradation, overdraft, and
    interference with existing uses of ground water will need to be continually monitored.
    The intensive monitoring required may warrant a decentralized approach to water/energy
    management. Requiring district hydrogeologists to be in charge of implementing a
    mutually agreed upon management plan within the district is an option to be considered by
    WRD. This would ensure hands-on monitoring of reservoir capabilities and would provide
    an early warning system for conflicts or problems that may occur. Greater knowledge of
    ground water resources would be provided to the state by the local hydrogeologists. The
    management functions of the district would always be at the discretion of WRD.
    The mandate of Oregon Water Law is that the water of the state belongs to the public.
    To ensure preservation of public welfare, safety and health, beneficial use without waste
    is the basis of the right to appropriate water. To accomplish this goal, WRD needs to
    evaluate known and potential low temperature geothermal resource areas so use of ground
    water for its thermal properties can be managed and protected in concert with other uses
    of ground water.
    It is the responsibility of WRD to administer public law and policy relative to ground
    water supplies. Evidence indicates that ground water use is becoming a popular source of
    space heating and cooling. With the use of ground water now conceptually reframed to
    include thermal applications, WRD will be considering policy that will continue to serve
    the public.
    5U67&
    26
    [3-114]-
    

    -------
    REFERENCES
    Allen, Eliot, "Preliminary Model Ordinance for Municipal Geothermal District
    Heating and Reservoir Management", Eliot Allen and Associates, Inc., Salem,
    OR, October 1980.
    Brown, David E., "Overview of Geothermal Electric Resource Assessment, Technologies
    and Development Forecast in Oregon", Oregon Department of Energy, Salem,
    OR, November 1982.
    Colorado Revised Statutes, "Title 37, Article 90.5, Geothermal Resources",
    Denver, CO, May 1983. "Oregon Interagency Geothermal Fluid Report", Oregon
    Department of Energy, Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries,
    Oregon Department of Environmental Quality and Oregon Department of Water
    Resources, Pursuant to House Joint Resolution 50, October 1978.
    Geothermal Task Force, "Final Report to the Oregon Alternate Energy
    Development Commission", Salem, OR, June 1980.
    Justus, D.J., Basescu, N., Bloomquist, R.G., Higbee, C. and Simpson, S.,
    "Oregon; A Guide to Geothermal Energy Development", OIT Geo-Heat
    Utilization Center in cooperation with Oregon Department of Energy, June 1980.
    Lund, J.W., Culver, G. and Lienau, P. J., "Groundwater Characteristics and
    Corrosion Problems Associated with the use of Geothermal Water in Klamath
    Falls, Oregon", Oregon Institute of Technology, Klamath Falls, OR, 1978.
    Oregon Alternate Energy Development Commission, "Future Renewable Final
    Report", Salem, OR, September 1980.
    "Oregon Interagency Fluid Report", Pursuant to House Joint Resolution 50,
    Department of Energy, Department of Environmental Quality, Department of
    Geology and Mineral Industries and Department of Water Resources, October
    1978.
    Reed, Marshall J., Editor, "Assessment of Low-Temperature Goethermal Resources
    of the United States - 1982", U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with U.S.
    Department of Energy, Circular 892, 1982.
    27
    [3-
    

    -------
    BIBLIOGRAPHY
    Amsterdam, Bruce, "Closed Loop Earth-Coupled Heat Pump Systems", Water Well
    -Journal, Volume 37, Number 7, Worthington, OH, July 1983.
    Anderson, D.N. and Lund, J.W., Editors, "Direct Utilization of Geothermal
    Energy: A Technical Handbook", Geothermal Resources Council Special Report
    Number 7, Geothermal Resources Council and Geo-Heat Utilization Center,
    Oregon Institute of Technology, 1979.
    Culver, G. and Reistad, G.M., "Evaluation and Design of Downhole Heat
    Exchangers for Direct Application", Oregon Institute of Technology, Klamath
    Falls, OR.
    Gass, T.E. and Lehr, J.H., "Ground Water Energy and the Ground Water Heat
    Pump", Water Well Journal, Volume 30, Number <», Worthington, OH, April 1977.
    Gardner, T.C., Bressler, S.E. and King, D., "Existing Institutional Arrangements
    for Geothermal District Heating Systems: Their Value as Models and Their
    Lessons for Future Planning", Geothermal Energy Project, Earl Warren Legal
    Institute, Berkeley, CA, January 1981.
    Gunther, J.J., Executive Director, "Groundwater and Geothermal: Urban
    District Heating Applications", U.S. Conference of Mayors, Washington DC, 1982.
    Holt, B. and Campbell, R.G., "Modular Binary Cycle Power Plants", The Ben Holt
    Co., Pasadena, CA, May 1982.
    National Conference of State Legislatures, "Geothermal Guidebooks": Prepared for
    the Oregon Legislature, 1980 Geothermal Policy Review, Energy Program -
    Geothermal Project, National Conference of State Legislatures, Denver, CO,
    May 1980.
    National Conference of State Legislatures, "Preliminary Geothermal Profile
    State of Oregon", Geothermal Policy Report, National Conference of State
    Legislatures, Denver, CO, October 1978.
    Sherk, George W., "Oregon Small Scale Hydroelectric and Geothermal Resources:
    Legislative Recommendations and Alternatives", National Conference of State
    Legislatures, Energy Program, Denver, CO, January 1981.
    28
    [3-11S]
    

    -------
    APPENDIX I
    [3-117]
    

    -------
    OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
    CHAPTER 690, DIVISION 65 - WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
    STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES FOR
    LOW TEMPERATURE GEOTHERMAL WELLS AND EFFLUENT DISPOSAL SYSTEMS
    65-005 POLICY AND PURPOSE:
    (1)	All Low Temperature Geothermal Fluids are part of the ground water resources of the
    State of Oregon and shall be administered by the Water Resources Director (Director)
    under the provisions of ORS 537.010 to 537.795. The Director recognizes that these fluids
    are developed primarily because of their thermal characteristics and that special
    management is necessary. Reservoir assessment of Low Temperature Geothermal Flutds
    shall be conducted by the Director in the same manner as ground water investigations
    outlined in ORS 537.665 and ORS 537.685.
    (2)	The purpose of the following rules is to provide standards and procedures for the
    development, use and management of Low Temperature Geothermal Fluids, while insuring
    proper management of all ground water resources so maximum beneficial use of the
    resource will be most effectively attained.
    (3)	These rules supplement OAR 690-10-005 to 690-10-045, 690-60-005 to 690-63-045, and
    690-64-000 to 690-64-010. Rule 690-60-050, paragraph 47 and 690-61-181 are hereby
    rescinded.
    DELETE:
    [690-60-050 (47) "Thermal Ground Water": means ground water having a
    temperature greater than 90 degrees Fahrenheit or 32 degrees Celsius. (The statutes
    of Oregon delegate to the Department of Water Resources the appropriation and
    supervision of thermal ground water having a temperature of less than 250 degrees
    Fahrenheit or 121 degrees Celsius, and occurring within 2,000 feet of the land
    surface.)]
    [690-61-181 CONSTRUCTION OF THERMAL OR HOT WATER WELLS:
    All thermal or hot water wells having a maximum water temperatue of les3 than 250
    degrees Fahrenheit (121 degrees Celsius) and constructed to depths of less than 2,000
    feet shall be constructed in conformance with rules 690-61-006 through 690-61-176.
    The bottom-hole temperature shall be measured and recorded on the water well
    report.]
    i
    [3-118]-
    

    -------
    65-010 DEFINITIONS:
    (1)	Bottom Hole Temperature: The maximum temperature measured in the well or bore
    hole. It is normally attained directly adjacent to the producinq zone, and rommonly
    at or near the bottom of the borehole.
    (2)	Low Temperature Geothermal Effluent: The outflow, discharge or waste fluid, with
    its associated dissolved nr sur,ppnded constituents (heinq onqinal or introduced), that
    is produced by a Low Temperature Geothermal Well and its utilization system.
    (3)	Low Temperature Geothermal Fluid;
    (a)	Any ground water produced from a Low Temperature Geothermal Well which is
    used for its thermal characteristics; or
    (b)	any other fluids, approved by the Director, that circulate, with or without
    withdrawal, within a Low Temperature Geothermal Well, where in all cases of
    (a) and (b) the fluid circulated because of its thermal characteristics, is used for
    various heating and/or cooling purposes including, but not limited to,
    residential, commercial, industrial, electrical, agricultural and aquacultural
    applications.
    (4)	Low Temperature Geothermal Reiniection Well: Any well as defined under ORS
    537.515(7) that is constructed or used for returning Low Temperature Geothermal
    Effluent to a ground water reservoir.
    (5)	Low Temperature Geothermal Well: Any well as defined under ORS 537.515(7) with a
    bottom hole temperature less than 250°F that is constructed or used for the thermal
    properties of the fluid contained within.
    (6)	Nonstandard Low Temperature Geothermal Effluent Disposal System: Any Low
    Temperature Geothermal Effluent Disposal System in which one or more of the
    following conditions are met:
    (a) Any portion of the effluent is disposed of in a manner considered non-beneficial
    by the Director. This includes, but is not limited to, disposal via storm sewer,
    drainage hole or direct discharge to land surface or a surface water body.
    ii
    [3-119] -
    

    -------
    (b)	The effluent contains contaminants, other than heat, that have been added to
    the Low Temperature Geothermal Fluid.
    (c)	The effluent is reinjected to a ground water reservoir that is not considered
    suitable by the Director. Factors which may render a ground water reservoir
    unsuitable include, but are not limited to, chemical or physical incompatibility
    of the fluids involved or adverse hydraulic characteristics of the receiving
    reservoir.
    (d)	There are existing or potential problems or special conditions as determined by
    the Director. Problems or special conditions resulting from the effluent
    disposal system which may warrant a nonstandard designation include, but are
    not limited to, instability of near-surface earth materials, undue alteration of
    thermal characteristics, unreasonable head changes or downslope subsurface
    leakage of effluent.
    (7)	Secondary Use Consumption of Low Temperature Geotherma! Effluent for beneficial
    use including, but not limited to, domestic, irrigation, stock watering, commercial
    and industrial uses.
    (8)	Standard Low Temperature Geothermal Effluent Disposal System: Any Low
    Temperature Geothermal Effluent Disposal System in which one of the following
    conditions are met:
    (a)	No contaminants except heat have been added to the Low Temperature
    Geothermal Fluid and the effluent is put to a Secondary Use.
    (b)	No contaminants except heat have been added to the Low Temperature
    Geothermal Fluid and the effluent is returned to the producing or other suitable
    ground water reservoir and there are no other existing or potential problems or
    special conditions as determined by the Director including, but not limited to,
    those factors, problems and conditions listed in 65-010 definition 6, paragraphs
    c and d.
    lit
    [3-1201"
    

    -------
    SU8DIVIS0N 1
    WELL CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS
    65-015 LOW TEMPERATURE GEOTHERMAL WELL AND REINJECTION WELL
    CONSTRUCTION: Low Temperature Geothermal Wells and Reinjection Wells shall be
    constructed in conformance with applicable rules (OAR 690-10-005 to 690-10-040 and
    690-60-005 to 690-63-065) with specific additions and modifications as described in OAR
    69Q-o5-GQ5 to 69Q-o5-070.
    65-020 LOW TEMPERATURE GEOTHERMAL REINJECTION WELL LOCATION: For
    appropriations not exceeding 15,000 gallons per day no Low Temperature Geothermal
    Reinjection Weil shall be located within 75 feet of any existing Low Temperature
    Geothermal Weil utilizing the same ground water reservoir without authorization from the
    Director, unless both the withdrawal and reinjection wells are on the same parcel of land
    and are used by the same ground water appropriator. A variance from the 75-foot setback
    requirement may be issued by the Director, followinq a written request for special
    standards (described by 690-60-040) by the water well constructor or landowner, who under
    the provisions of 537.753, is constructing the well, if hydrologic and thermal conditions
    permit closer spacing.
    For appropriations exceeding 15,000 gallons per day, the appropriator shall submit plans for
    review to the Director or his authorized representative, indicating separation distances
    between production and reinjection wells on the parcel of land on which the production well
    is located, on the parcel of land on which the reinjection well is located, and on ail
    adjoining parcels of land. In addition, the plans shall indicate the anticipated hourly
    production and reinjection rates, the maximum anticipated daily production, and any
    planned safeguards against undue thermal and hydrologic interference with existing rights
    to appropriate ground water and surface water.
    65-025 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED USE: For any Low Temperature Geothermal
    Well or Low Temperature Geothermal Reinjection Well, the report required under ORS
    537.762 prior to commencing construction shall identify the intended use of the well, the
    appropriator's name and the appropriator's mailing address.
    65-030 IDENTIFICATION OF INTENDED WELL USE: Any Low Temperature
    Geothermal Well or Low Temperature Geothermal Reinjection Well shall be clearly
    identified as such on the water well report filed with the Water Resources Department.
    IV
    [3-121]
    

    -------
    65-035_ WELL-HEAD PROTECTION EQUIPMENT: Adequate well-head equipment to
    insure public safety and the protection of the qround water resource shall be immediately
    installed on any Low Temperature Geothermal Well or Low Temperature Geothermal
    Reinjection Well when fluid temperatures of 63° C (150°F) or qreater are encountered
    during drilling# Low Temperature Geothermal Fluids produced during drilling or testing of
    such a well shall be disposed of in such a manner as to minimize health hazards. A
    variance from the requirement for well-head protection equipment may be granted if a
    written request demonstrates that the equipment is not necessary to safely complete the
    well.
    . 65-040 PUMP TESTING OF LOW TEMPERATURE GEOTHERMAL REINJECTION
    WELLS: All Low Temperature Geothermal Reinjection Weils shall be pump tested for a
    period of at least one hour; results must be recorded on the water well report. This
    minimum test shall be conducted as follows:
    (1)	Prior to testing, the static water level in the well shall be measured and
    recorded.
    (2)	Water shall be pumped into or from the well at a measured and steady rate; the
    rate shall approximate the maximum anticipated injection rate of the operating
    well.
    (3)	For tests that withdraw water, only bailing or pumping the well is acceptable.
    (4)	The water level in the well shall be measured and recorded both at the end of
    pumping and after one hour of recovery.
    (5)	For proposed disposal exceedinq 15,000 gallons per day the Director may
    prescribe a more detailed test that could include, but is not limited to,
    increased frequency of water level measurement, increased test duration and
    monitoring of observation wells. Such modifications will be required when
    possible impacts resulting from the development include, but are not limited to,
    thermal or hydrologic interference with existing water rights, water quality
    degradation or failure of well construction.
    v
    [3-122"]
    

    -------
    65-045 WATER TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENT: For any Low Temperature
    Geothermal Well that withdraws qround water, the water well report must include the
    maximum temperature measured in the borehole and its corresponding depth, and the
    temperature of the fluid as measured at the discharge point at the beginning and conclusion
    of a timed production test (i.e. pump or bailer test - air test unacceptable). The maximum
    temperature measured in the borehole and its corresponding depth is required on the water
    weil report for a Low Temperature Geothermal Well that does not withdraw ground water.
    65-050 ADDITIONAL STANDARDS FOR LOW TEMPERATURE GEOTHERMAL
    REINJECTION WELLS: Procedures required to reinject effluent into a Low Temperature
    Geothermal Reinjection Well must not cause failure of casing and seal material or other
    components of the well construction.
    VI
    [3-123]
    

    -------
    SUBDIVISION 2
    LOW TEMPERATURE GEOTHERMAL EFFLUENT DISPOSAL
    65-055 EFFLUENT DISPOSAL BY REINJECTION / FLUID QUALITY ASSESSMENT:
    Prior to reinjection, users required to file for water right3 shall supply the Director fluid
    quality information concerning the Low Temperature Geothermal Fluid, the Low
    Temperature Geothermal Effluent, and the ground water in the receiving zone of any Low
    Temperature Geothermal Reinjection Well for systems that withdraw and reinject ground
    water in order that the Low Temperature Geothermal Effluent Disposal System be
    classified a3 Standard or Nonstandard. The required information shall include a certified
    chemical analysis for the following parameters: Temperature, pH, Suspended Solids,
    Specific Conductance, Total Dissolved Solids, Total Coliform Bacteria, Arsenic, Boron,
    Calcium, Carbonate or Bicarbonate, Chloride, Iron, Magnesium, Manganese, Potassium,
    Silica, Sodium and Sulfate. If poor water quality or water quality incompatible with the
    reinjection zone fluids is suspected, the Director may require additional specific data. The
    Director may waive the requirement for specific portions or all of the chemical analysis if
    the fluid quality is known to be suitable for the intended withdrawal and reinjection.
    vii
    [3-124]
    

    -------
    SUBDIVISION 3
    WATER RIGHTS PROCEDURE
    65-060 PROCESSING OF APPLICATIONS: The appropriator shall make application
    for a water right to appropriate Low Temperature Geothermal Fluid unless an exemption is
    provided for under ORS 537.545.
    65-065 EXEMPTION FROM WATER RIGHT PERMIT APPLICATION / USE OF LOW
    TEMPERATURE GEOTHERMAL FLUID: Low Temperature Geothermal Fluid appropriation
    for single industrial or commercial use including, but not limited to, electrical,
    agricultural, aquacultural, heating and/or cooling in an amount not exceeding 5,000 gallons
    per day shall be exempt from application for a water right as provided for under ORS
    537.54 5. This exemption applies to the use of ground water for any such purpose to the
    extent that it is beneficial and constitutes a right to appropriate ground water equal to
    that established by a ground water right certificate.
    65-070 WATER RIGHT LIMITATION FOR NONSTANDARD EFFLUENT DISPOSAL
    SYSTEMS: If the Low Temperature Geothermal Effluent is disposed of by way of a
    Nonstandard Low Temperature Geothermal Effluent Disposal System, the right to
    appropriate the Low Temperature Geothermal Fluid shall be inferior to all subsequent
    rights for beneficial consumptive use and/or to the rights of those appropriators who make
    use of a Standard Low Temperature Geothermal Effluent Disposal System. If a
    Nonstandard Low Temperature Geothermal Effluent Disposal System is upgraded to a
    Standard Low Temperature Geothermal Effluent Disposal System the associated water
    right retains the priority date established upon initial filing.
    vin
    [3-125]
    

    -------
    APPENDIX II
    [3-126]
    

    -------
    APPROPRIATION OP WATER GENEHALi Y
    537 525 I
    537 450 Rules (or proof oa lo work
    and use of water under permits, noncom-
    pliance as evidence In cancellation pro*
    cceding* The Water Resouices Director may
    bv rule provide thai the owners of permits
    shall submit or furnish proofb of commence-
    ment of work prosecution of work with due
    diligence completion of work. and of the ap
    plication of waler to a beneficial use undei the
    permits Failure to comp)> with his lules in
    respect to such proofs shall be considered
    prima facie evidence of failure to commence
    work, prosecute woik with due diligence,
    complete work, or apply water to the benefi-
    cial use contemplated b> the permit, as the
    case ma> be, in the proceedings provided in
    ORS 537 410 to 537 440 for the cancellation of
    permits
    APPROPRIATION OF
    UNDERGROUND WATERS
    (GROUND WATER ACT OF
    1935)
    537 505 Short title. ORS 537 505 to
    537 795 shall be known as the "Ground Water
    Act of 1955 "lite* c 704 II. IfrCJ c7M HI
    IHSlOlfUp^Jcdb)	10a 138)
    537 515 Definition* for OnS 537 505 to
    537 795 \* used in ORS 537 505 to 537 795,
    unless the content requires other* ise
    (1 > "Altering* a well means tho deepening,
    ricaaing. perforating, imperforating, the in-
    stallation of packers or seals ond othor mate-
    rial changes In tho design of the well
    (2)	"Constructing" a well includes boring,
    digging drilling or excavating and installing
    casing or well screens
    (3)	Ground water** means any water,
    except capillar} moisture, beneath the land
    surface or beneath the bed of an> stream,
    lake reservoir or other body of surface water
    within the boundaries of this state, whatever
    may be the geological formation or structure
    in which such water stands, flows, percolates
    or otherwise moves
    (4)	'Ground water reservoir" mean* a
    designated body of standing or moving gTound
    water having exterior buundanes which may
    be ascertained or reasonably inferred
    (5)	"Pollution" of ground water means any
    impairment of the natural quality of such
    ground water, however caused, including
    impairment by salines, minerals, industrial
    wastes, domestic vvustes or sewage, whether
    indrofted dircctl) or through infiltration into
    the ground water supply
    (6)	"Public agency' means the United
    States or any agency thereof, the Slate of
    Oregon or any agenc) thereof or any county,
    cit). district organized for public purposes or
    other public corporation or political subdivi-
    sion of this state
    (7)	"Well" means an> artificial opening or
    artificially altered natural opening, however
    made, by which gTound water is sought or
    through which ground water flows under
    natural pressure or i* artificially withdrawn,
    provided, that this definition shall not include
    a natural spring or wells drilled for the pur-
    pose of
    (a)	Prospecting, exploration or production
    of oil or gas.
    (b)	Prospecting or exploration for geother-
    mal resources, as defined in ORS 522 005, or
    
    power dtivcn pcrcu>«ion rotai>, boring, dig
    ging or augering machine u»ed in the con-
    struction of water wells |I9S9 c 70d |3 1961 cU4
    H I9TSC ua UJI
    1*7 &2QltUy*m\r4b) I9iic70d»33|
    537 625 Policy The legislative Assem-
    bly recognises, declare* and finds that tho
    right to reasonable control of all water within
    this state from oil sources of water supply
    belongs to the public and that in order to
    insure the preservation of the publu welfare,
    safety and health it is necessary that
    til Provision he made for the final deter-
    mination of relative rights to appropriate
    ground water evci)where within this state
    and of other matters wiih regard thereto
    through a system of registration, permits and
    adjudication
    (2i Rights to appiopriate ground water
    and priority thureof be acknowledged and
    piotected, except when, under certain condi-
    tions, the public welfare, safety and health
    require otherwise
    (3) Beneficial use without waste, within
    the capacity of available sources, be the basin,
    measure and extent of the right to appropriate
    ground water
    2&J
    W
    I
    N>
    •>1
    Propose to add to 537.515 as (5);
    "Low temperature geothermal fluid" means
    any "Ground water" used for its thermal
    characteristics that is encountered in a well
    with a bottom hole temperature less than
    250°F.
    

    -------
    SJ7 5J5	* AT Ell I.WVS
    (li All r\ nms to iighu to ap|iropri iu
    b'tuimd waUi bo nude a matter of public
    i ec»»rd
    i "j) Adequate and safe supplies of ground
    u iu'i for human consumption be assured
    while conserving ina\imum supplies Ihcieof
    for agricultural. commercial, industrial, recie-
    ational .ind other beneficial um-s
    iG) The location, extent, capncit). quality
    and other characteristics of particular sources
    of ground water be determined
    (7)	Reasonably stable ground water levels
    be determined and maintained
    (8)	Depletion of ground water supplier
    b«.lntv economic levels impairment of nuturol
    quVity of ground water b> pollution and
    wasteful practices in connection with ground
    water be presented or controlled within prac-
    ticable limits
    (0) Whenever wasteful us>* of gTound
    water, impairment of or interference wtih
    existing rights to appropriate surface water,
    declining ground water levels, intirfeienco
    an or.g wells, overdrawing of ground water
    supplies or pollution of ground water exist* or
    impends controlled use of the ground water
    concerned be authorised and imposed under
    voluntary joint action b> the Water Resources
    Director and the ground water users con
    cerned whenever possible, but b> the director
    under (he police power of the Mate when such
    voluntary joint action is not taken or is inef-
    fective
    1101 Location, construction, depth capaci-
    ty weld and other characteristics of and mat-
    ter* in connection with wells be controlled in
    accordance with the purposes set forth in this
    section U9i5c7Ctfi-.il
    5374J0|fUp»al*lby I9SS c 700 138)
    537 535 Unlawful use or appropria-
    tion of ground water, including well con*
    btruclion and operation (U No purwm or
    public agency shall use or attempt to use any
    ground water, construct or attempt to con-
    struct any well or other means of developing
    and securing ground water or operate or per-
    mit the operation of any well owned or con
    trolled by such person or public agency except
    upon compliance with ORS 537 505 to 537 795
    and any applicable order rule or notation
    promulgated by the Water Resources Director
    under ORS 537 505 to 537 795
    (2) Except for those uwi exempted under
    ORS 537 545. the use of ground water for any
    purpose, without a permit issued under ORS
    517 oi retaliation undci ORS 5.J7 (>0"», is
    an unlawful appro,>i i ation of ground water
    H'1'5 r 70S lOr»7 c III »jb«ritgn iJl nutlet an
    I'JO I c bCU IJ '
    U7 M0 |K* |wjUil b) c 70d I3H|
    537 545 Exempt uses No registration,
    certificate of registration application for a
    permit pei mil, certificate of completion or
    ground water right certificate under ORS
    537 505 to 537 79^ is required for the use of
    ground w^Ur for stock*alering purposes, for
    watering an> liwn or noncommercial garden
    not exceeding oiu half acie in area for 6ingle
    or group domestic purposes in an amount not
    exceeding 15OU0 gallons a day or for any
    bingle industrial 01 coinincrci.il purpose in an
    amount not exceeding 5,IH)(J gallons a day
    The use of ground water for nn> such purpose
    to the cxte nl that it is beneficial constitutes a
    right to appropriate ground water equal to
    that established b\ a ground wiier right cer-
    tificate issued under ORS 5J7 700 Die Wjter
    Resources Din ctor, however may require any
    person or public agenc) using ground water
    for on) such purpose to furnish information
    with re'gaid to such gnound water and the use
    thurcuf |i9Si c 70s 151
    M7 W0iK*i**l.d l»> Ji)5S c 70b I Mi I
    ftai &G0lH*t*airJ by IttJSeTUtt I3bl
    M7-J70 llkujlcd it) lU5ic70o |a<*J
    5J7 575 l*i rut its grunted, upproved or
    pending under former law An> permit
    granted or application for a permit approved
    under ORS 537 310. 537 520. 537 530.
    537 540. 537 550 537 5(.0. 537 570. 537 580.
    537 590 and 537 600 pnor to and still valid
    and in effect on August 3, 195r> is considered
    to be a permit issued under ORS 537 6'J5 Any
    application for a permit under ORS 5J7 510.
    537 520. 537 530 537 510 537 550. 537 360.
    537 570. 537 580 537 500 and 537 LOG pnor
    to, pending and not yet approved on August 3,
    1955, shall be governed as an application for a
    permit under ORS 537 615 to 537 C25 (10^6
    «70ft 66(11]
    U7 SAO HUpruli-O by IUS5 c 7uH |J8|
    637 535 Ilcneficiul use of ground wa-
    ter prior to August 3, 1955. rccognued as
    right to appropriate water when regis-
    tered Except as otherwise provided in ORS
    537 545 or 537 575 or 5)7 595 and subject to
    determination under ORS 5 J7 070 to 537 095.
    actual and lawful application of ground woter
    to beneficial use prior to August 3, 1955, by or
    2*4
    O
    I
    ro
    co
    Propose that 537.525(5) be modified t& read:
    Adequate and safe supplies of ground water
    for human consumption be assured while
    conserving maximum supplies thereof for
    agricultural, commercial, industrial,
    thermal, recreational and other beneficial
    uses.
    Propose that 537.525(9) be modified to read:
    Whenever wasteful ube of ground water,
    impairment of or interference with existing
    rights to appropriate surface water,
    declining ground water levels, alteration of
    ground water temperatures, interference
    among wells, thermal interference among
    wells, overdrawing of ground water supplies
    or pollution of ground water exists or
    impends, controlled use of the ground water
    concerned be authorized and imposed under
    voluntary join action by the Water
    Resources Director and the ground water
    users concerned whenever possible, but by
    the director under the police power of the
    state when such voluntary joint action is not
    taken or is ineffective.
    Propose to add to 537.525:
    (II) Reasonably stable ground water
    temperatures be determined and maintained.
    ii
    

    -------
    AI'PIIOlMtlATION OF WA1 EH GENLUAI l.\
    537 G25
    tin> Such other infoi mation a» (he dn ecior
    deem> ucccssar)
    (3> E.tch application for a permit shall bo
    accompanied b\ such map* and drawings and
    other data as the director deems nccessar>
    I I03i c TOO IS !9A9c43?l3|
    537 620 Acceptance, recordation and
    approval of application* (1) The Water
    He^ouices Director shall accept all applica-
    tions for permits referred to in ORS 537 615
    2>ubmitU'd to the director in pruper form in-
    dorse thereon the date of receipt and record
    each application in a took kept bv the director
    for thai purpose
    «2i If upon examination b) the director
    the application is found to be defective, the
    application shall bo relumed lo the applicant
    to u"Tud\ the defect The date of and the
    reason* for the leturn & hall be indorsed un the
    application and the indoisemeni ahull be
    mde a recoid in (he office of the director No
    application shall lose its pnorit) of filing on
    account of an> such defect providing an ac-
    ceptable application is filed in the office uf the
    Jirector within 30 davs from the date of the
    return of the application lo the applicant, or
    such fuither lime, not exceeding one year, as
    mat be allowed b> the director
    (3i When an application di*clo»cs the
    probability of wasteful use or undue interfer-
    ence with existing wells or that an> proposed
    use or well will impair or substantial!) inter*
    fere with existing right* to appioptiat? sur
    face water b> others the director ma> impure
    conditions or limitations in the permit to
    prevent the same or reject the .same after
    hearing, or. in the director's discretion initi-
    ate a proceeding for the di lermin ition of a
    critical irround water area under OI(S 5J7 730
    to 537 740
    Hum When an application disclose* the
    probtbilily that a proposed use or well will
    impair or interfere with the abililv lo extract
    hej! fiom a well with a bottom hole tempera-
    ture of at least 250 degrees Fahrenheit, the
    director may
    (A) Appiovc the permil
    «Li» Impose conditions oi limitations in the
    ftcrmit to prevent the probable inte i fcience or
    impairment.
    lC> After a hearing reject the application.
    or
    (Di Iniliulc a piocitduig for the determi-
    nation of a ciiliral ground water aiea under
    Olib 5J7 730 lo 537 740
    (b) In deciding whethci to i»uc deny or
    condition a permit under this subjection. I he
    director shall consider any orders* or permits
    applicable to the reservoir issued b> the gov*
    erning board or State Geologist of the State
    Department of Geology and Mineral indeis-
    tries under ORS chapter 522
    (5) An application may be approved for
    less ground vvatcr than applied for or may be
    approved upon terms, conditions und limita-
    tions necessary for the protection of the public
    welfare, safety and health In any event the
    application shall not be approved for more
    ground water than is applied for or than can
    be applied to a beneficial use No application
    shall be approved when the same will deprive
    those having prior rights of appropriation for
    a beneficial u»e of the amount of water to
    which the} are lawfully entitled II8SS c 70d
    110 Iftol c &69 Hi
    537 622 Protest against issuance of
    permit, hearing tl) Any owner of or claim-
    ant to a right to appropriate surface or ground
    water may file jointly or severally, with the
    Water Rtsourcis Due-dor at an> time prior to
    the issuance of a permit to appropriate giound
    water under ORS ^37 C25, a protest again*'
    the issuance of the permit
    (2) Whenever, in the opinion of the direc-
    tor, a hearing is nccessar) to determine
    whether the proposed use or well described in
    an application under ORS 537 615 will con-
    flict with existing rights to appropiiate sur
    face or ground water, he or his authorized
    assistant may hold a hearing on 10 da>*'
    written notice to the applicant and proles-
    tunls. such hearing to Im. in the manner pro*
    vidod by Ollis 537 430 (11)69 Replacement
    {'artJ HK7c34l ui
    537 625 Is*uuncc of permit Li applica-
    tion approved, contents of pernnl, effect,
    rejection of application (I) The approval of
    an application ufcried to in OltS 537 GIS
    shall be set forth in a ground watei right
    permit i&sued b) the diurtor The-1* i nut bhall
    specify the detuiU of the authoiucd use and
    shall set forth such term*, limitation* and
    conditions us the director considers approprt
    ale A cop) of the piinul shall be filed a** a
    public recoid in the office of ihc director The
    permit shall be mailed lo the applicant, mid
    upon receipt thcicof the |>eriiwllcc' inay pro
    cce'd lo take ail nctiun requited tu apply the
    water to the designated beneficial use and to
    perfect the proposed appropriation
    Propose that 537.620(3) be modified to read:
    When an application discloses the
    probability of wasteful use or undue
    interference with existing wells or that any
    proposed use or well will impair or
    substantially interfere with existing rights
    to appropriate surface water by others, or
    that any proposed use or well will impair or
    substantially interfere with existing rights
    to appropriate ground water for its thermal
    characteristics for beneficial purposes, the
    director may impose conditions or
    limitations in the permit to prevent the
    same or reject the same after hearing, or, in
    the director's discretion, initiate a
    proceeding for the determination of a
    critical ground water area under
    ORS 537.730 to 537.740.
    

    -------
    5J7 735
    to The welN of giound watci claim »iatui
    ipjiiopi i.ituii ^illiin (lie ana in question
    inttilcrf or .iic lik*. 1 y to intciiiic with the
    pii*liution of giuilitrm.il iimjiiiim ftum nn
    irn regulated under ORS chapter 522 or the
    piooiKtiun of geuthernial rt amices ft on k on
    in' i ngulattd under OHS chapter 522 inter-
    file •» or In hkelv to interft te w nh on exiling
    ground water appiopriation.
    td> The available ground water suppl) in
    the area in question is being or is obout to be
    ov ci dr j wn, or
    ie» The punt) of the giound water in the
    area in question has been or rosonabl) ina>
    be expected to become polluted to an ealenl
    cuntrar) to the public welfare health and
    safetv
    tii The director or the authouicri asjis
    i.nil of the director bhall hold a public h«.anrg
    on tht question of (he detci nunation of a
    critical ground water area Wiitlcn notice of
    the* hearing shall be given to each water well
    contractor and each well drilling machine
    ojwi.tior luer»ed under OltS 537 7-17 whose
    address a* shown on the license la within am
    countv in which an> part of the area in qucs
    lion is located and lo each person or public
    agi'tnv known to the directoi fiom an ekami-
    intion of the records in the office of the diiec
    lor to be a claimant or appiopriator of ground
    \\ itrr in the areu in qu« slum Notice of the
    li« aring -hall aUo be published in at h ast one
    hiue each week for at lca*t two consecutive
    wciks m at lia>t one ncwspap*i of general
    circul itioi in the area in que it ion If the urea
    in qui -turn is located in whole or in part with
    in lhe limits of an) city, notice of the hearing
    bhill \k published in at least one issue each
    week for at least two consecutive weeks in a
    ncw>p iper of general circulation published in
    the cit> if an> and written notue of the hear-
    ing shall be given to the ma>or or chairman of
    the governing body of the cit> Written notices
    sh «|| be given and the last publication date of
    published notices shall be al least 30 days
    prior to the hearing
    <3) Oral ami documentary evidence may
    be taken at Ihe public hearing A full rccoid
    shall he.* kept of all evidence taken at the
    hearing and Ihe procedure shall be such as to
    secure a full fair und ordeily proceeding and
    to permit all r< lev ant ev idi nee to be received
    I t'JiS c TOtf 126 1957 c 341 IS Itldl c l5|
    537 735 Order declaring critical
    ground wuter area, content* of order. II)
    If, at the conclusion of the public hearing held
    under ORS 3 47 7JO. tin Water Resources
    Director finds that jny of the circumstances
    m t foiili in OKS 037 (iJO (i) and (4) if the
    pioictding is uuli.ited iheicunder, or in ORS
    5J7 730 (I) if Ihe piocceding is initiated there*
    under, are hue, and further finds that the
    public wclfaie. health and s^fet> requite that
    any one or moic corrective controls be adopt-
    ed, the director shall b> order declare the area
    in question to be a critical giound water area
    (2) The order of the director shall define
    the boundaries of the critical ground water
    area and bhall ind talc which of the ground
    water reservous loctttd within the area in
    question are included within the critical
    ground water nre.i Any nuiitUr of ground
    waUr rc:>crvotr» which tiihcr whollv or par-
    ti.ill) overlie one another ina> be included
    within the same ci itical giound water area
    131 If the onU r is ba^cd corrpletel) or in
    part on actual ot likel> inuifercnce between
    ground water iiseis and geothermal resources
    regulated under Oltb chapter 522 the order
    shall demonstrate ion»idciation of any orders
    or pcrmitb appluabiv to the reservoir issued
    bv the governing boaid or State Geologist of
    Ihe Slate Depart n cnl of Geulog) and Mineral
    Industries under Oftd chapter 522
    (41 The Older of the director may include
    any onu or moic of the following corrective
    control proviiiuns
    la) A provision closing the critical ground
    water oico to an> further appropriation of
    giound water, in which event the director
    shall thereafter refuse lo accept any applica-
    tion for u permit to appropriate ground water
    located within such ci itical area
    (b)	A provision determining the pcrmibM-
    bio total withdrawal of giound water in the
    critical area each da>. month or year, and. in
    so far os ma> be rcasonabl) done, ihe director
    6hall apportion such permissible total with-
    drawal among the appropi tutors holding valid
    righu to the giound water in the critical area
    in accordance with the relative dates of priori-
    ty of such rights
    (c)	A provision accoiding preference, with-
    out reference to relative priorities to with
    drawals of gTound water in the cniical area
    for residential and livestock watering pur-
    poses first Thereafter the dueclor may au-
    thoruc* withdiawals of ground water in Ihe
    cniical area fur other beneficial purposes,
    including agricultural, tndustriil, municipal
    other than residential, and recreational pur-
    poses, in 6uch order as the director deems
    261
    Propose to add to 537.730(1):
    (f)- Ground water temperatures in the
    area in question are expected to be altered,
    are being altered, or have been altered
    excessively.
    

    -------
    sn 710
    WA1EH LAWS
    .ulvi&able uiukr (ho circumstances so long as
    -uch withdriwal will not matenall) af'cct a
    pioperl\ de>igncd and opt rating e 11 with
    pi 101 right* that |M>ncti.iW s the aquifer
    'd' A provision reducing the permissible
    vMihdi.mjl of ground water by an\ one or
    more appropriators or wells in the critical
    area
    (e) Where two or more wells in the critical
    area are ut-ed b\ the sjire appropnalor, a
    piovuion adjusting the total permissible with-
    draw il of grourd water b> such appropriator
    or a provision forbidding the use of one or
    more of such wells completely
    if) A provision requiring the abatement,
    in viatic or in part or the scaling of an) well
    in the critical area re^pon-oble for the adini*
    moii of polluting mater als into the ground
    water supplv or responsible for the progres-
    sive impairment of the qualit) of ihe ground
    wjtcr supply b> dispersing polluting materi
    al> that have entered the ground water supply
    previous!)
    igi A provision requiring and spcufving a
    s)Stem of rotation of use of ground water in
    the critical arta
    ¦ hi An> one or more provisions making
    such additional requiren enis ns ai e nece ssary
    to pru>cct the public welfare l.eullh and safe
    t) in accordance uith the inient purposes and
    requirements of ORS 537 505 to 537 795
    (Si As used in this section residential
    purposes" means
     billtd b> a municipality fur v*oter received
    altlo dwelling |rj})c7G6W7 1901 c 16V 16 IVOI
    c ''IV III
    5,17 710 filing findings ol fiu t and
    orei« r, cop) to parties, changing order (I I
    lite Wnltr liisuur(\>i Director shall fiU in his
    ollicc Iha finding* of fail bun d ii|ani thr evi
    (li nu and hia onlci bisid ii|*jii mull findings
    in.i«lt> ,»•» piovulcd in OltS 6 17 7 15 llu diiii
    toi >11 ill deliver eopu's of Mich finding* ami
    imlir to ail parties in the prcMc«dmt» fui the
    <1. ti i munition of u t ritirul giound wnt« r area
    Die* dnrctoi shall file a eopy of the ofd« r wttli
    llu* county eli'ik of each muiily within which
    .in) pn1 of the critical gruuiul water areo lira
    mid Kinli county clerk shall record tlio oider in
    tin ii<«<] n eoriit of tin county
    (2) The director may suspend, modify or
    cancel any order m ide as provided in OUS
    537 735 upon such notice and in such manner
    as he deems proper A certified copy of each
    suspension, modification or cancellation shall
    be filed and recorded as provided for orders in
    subsection U) of this section II95S c 708 128)
    537 745 Voluntary agreements among
    ground water users from same reservoir
    111 In the administration of ORS 537 505 to
    537 795. the Water Resources Director may
    encourage, promote and recognize voluntary
    agreements among ground water users from
    the same ground water reservoir When the
    director finds that an) such agreement, exe-
    cuted in writing and filed with the director, is
    consistent with the intent pulp"1"* and re*
    quirements of OUS 5d7 505 to 537 795. and in
    particular OKS 537 523 5J7 710 to 537 740
    and 537 780, he shall approve the agreement,
    and thereafter such agreement until termi-
    nated at provided in this subsection, sholl
    control in lieu of a formal order rule or regu-
    lation of the director under OKS 537 505 to
    537 795 An> agreement approved b> the
    director may l*c terminated by the lapse of
    time as provided in the ngrcemcnt by consent
    of the parties to the agreement or by order of
    the director when he finds after investigation
    and a public hearing upon adequate notice,
    that the agreement is not being substantially
    complied with by the parties thereto or that
    changed conditions have made the continu-
    ance of the agieement a detriment to the
    public welfare safely and health or conlrar)
    in an) particular to the intent, purposes and
    requirements of ORS £3/ 505 to 537 795
    (2) When any irrigation district, drainage
    district other district oig.inwed for public
    purposes or other public corporation or politi-
    cal subdivision of this t.taU is authorised b>
    low to enter into agreements of the* kind re-
    ferred to in luliniliun (I) of this fceitiun, the
    director may upiiiovc aueh ugre kci vuri
    for construction or ulti iotiun of wnt«r well*,
    offer to. or € nl«%r mio 
    -------
    S37 780
    n-ptii lit llu amount of water pumptd per
    minuU u hi n .» pump tesl !*> m uio
    ihiTla kind ind nature of the inuioi lal in
    1 uh -datum pmetiated with al least one
    mtrv h>r each change of formation. and the
    thickness of aquifers
    «t) The temperature of the ground nater
    1 ncounUred and other characteustics ol such
    pound water in surh detail 09 may be re-
    quired b> the director
    (3) If required bv the director, the person,
    public agec\c> or licensee re (erred to in subsec-
    tion «1> of thi» section shall furnish to the
    dncctor samples of the ground water and of
    e »uh change of formation in containets fur*
    m«-h the
    diiivtor |ii#S\ c 70S ».MJ 1901 c334 III 19dlc4lG
    .1.1
    M7 770 11955 c 70S WO 1957 c341 l9 rcpralrd b>
    llml c Jli U2I
    537 775 Wasteful or defective wells
    ¦ 11 Wheneve»r the Water Resources Director
    fmd» that an> well. including an) ^oil exempt
    under ORS 537 545. is b> the nature of Us
    uin-liurtion opt 1 at ion or otherwise causing
    w.i-telul use of ground water is undul) inter*
    lermg with other wells or is polluting giound
    u air or surface water supplies contrar> to
    ORS 537 S05 to 537 795. the dncctoi ma>
    order discontinuance of or impose conditions
    upon the use of such well to such extent as
    ma> be necessary to remedy the defect
    i2> In the absence of a determination of a
    critical ground water area. un> order issued
    pursuant to this section un|>osing conditions
    upon inurfering wells tball provide to each
    parte all water to which the parly u entitled,
    in accoidancc with the date of priority of the
    watertight 11955 cTGfl»25 198lc9l9IJ|
    537 777 Regulation by Water Re*
    sources Director of controlling works of
    wells and distribution of ground water.
    Whenever the Water Resources Director finds
    that an) person or public agency is using or
    attempting to use any ground water or it
    op< rating or permitting the opeution of any
    will o^ned or controlled by such person or
    public agenc> except upon compliance with
    OKS 537 505 to 537 795 and an) applicable
    nidir tule or regulation pinmulgaud bv the
    diuctor under ORS 537 505 to 537 795, or
    that it is neevssar) in order to secure the
    tqual and fair distribution of ground water in
    accordance with the rights of the various
    ground water users, the director 6hall regulate
    or cause lobe ri|;ulalcd (he controlling works
    of wells mid nh ill ('tstribulc i;iuund water in
    sueh a manner J* to ^icuri such compliance or
    such equal and fair distribution Such rcgula
    tion of controlling works and distribution of
    ground water shall bo as nearly os possible in
    the sainc manner a* piovidid in ORS 540 010
    Lo 540 130 H957 c 34i t«l
    537 760 Powers of Water Resources
    Director. In the administration of ORS
    537 505 to 537 795. the Water Resources Di-
    rector may
    (1) Require that all flowing wells be cap*
    ped or equipped w ith valves so thai the flow of
    ground water ma> be completely stopped
    when the ground water is not actually being
    applied to a beneficial use
    (2> Prescribe and enforce general stan-
    dards foi the construction and maintenance of
    veells and their casings fittings valves and
    pump* and special standards for the construc-
    tion and maintenance of particular wells end
    their casings, fittings valves and puinps
    (31 Prescribe and enforce uniform stan
    dards for the scientifie measurement of water
    levels and of ground water flowing or with-
    drawn from wells
    (41 Enter upon an> lands (or the purpose
    of inspecting wells including wells exempt
    under OKS 5 J7 545. casings, fittings, valves,
    pipes, pumps and measuring devices
    (51 Prosecute actions and suits to enjoin
    violations of ORS 537 505 to 537 795. and
    appear and become a part) to any action, suit
    or proceeding in an) court or before any ad*
    ministrative bod) when it appears to the
    satisfaction of the director that the dctermina*
    tion of such action, suit or proceeding might
    be in conflict with the public policy expressed
    in ORS 537 525
    (61 Call upon and receive advice and assis-
    tance from the Environmental Quality Com-
    mission or any other public agency or any
    person, and enter into cooperative agreements
    with any such publie agency or person
    (7) Promulgate and enforce such rule* as
    the director deems necessary to facilitate and
    assist in carr>lnfi oul functions under ORS
    537 505 lo 537 795 Such rules include, but
    arv not limited to rules governing
    tal The form and content of registration
    statements, certificates of registration, appli-
    cations lor permits, permits, certificates of
    completion, ground wuter right certificates.
    
    0>
    I
    CO
    ro,
    Propose that 537.775(1) be modified to read:
    Whenever the Water Resources Director
    finds that any well, including any well
    exempt under OKS 537.5^5, is by the nature
    of its construction, operation or otherwise
    causing wasteful use of ground water, is
    unduly interfering with other wells or is
    polluting ground water or surface water
    supplies or is causing substantial alteration
    of ground water temperatures or is causing
    substantial thermal interference with other
    wells contrary to ORS 537.505 to 537.795,
    the director may order discontinuance of or
    impose conditions upon the use of such well
    to such extent as may be necessary to
    remedy the defect.
    

    -------
    Section 3.2
    Heat Pump/Air Conditioning Return Flow Wells
    Supporting Data
    [3-133]
    

    -------
    SECTION 3.2.1
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (or SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    AUTHOR:
    (or INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:
    STUDY AREA:
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES:
    Ground-Water Heat Pumps in
    Pennsylvania
    E.W. Pine, C.W. Westlund,
    Bureau of Water Quality
    Management
    Not dated
    Pennsylvania
    USEPA Region III
    Not applicable
    This report examines the operation
    of a groundwater heat pump system
    including water temperature and
    volume requirements.	Also
    considered are the groundwater
    resources of Pennsylvania,
    specific applications, and cost
    comparisons with other heating and
    cooling systems. Areas of
    regulatory concern are also
    discussed.
    [3-134]
    

    -------
    GROUND-WATER HEAT PUMPS
    IN
    PENNSYLVANIA
    Eugene W. Pine, Hvdro^eolo^ist I
    Carlyle W. Westlund, Chief
    Ground-Water Unit
    Division of Water Quality
    Bureau of Water Oualitv Management
    [3-135]-
    

    -------
    INTRODUCTION
    Today, most Pennsvlvanians are faced with the high cost of heating and cooling
    their homes. As a result, some previously overlooked technologies are attracting
    renewed interest. Such is the case with ground-water heat pumps. Ground water
    provides an excellent source of energy for residential and commercial heat pumD
    systems, and is rapidly becoming an economic alternative to conventional sources
    of heat. They are especially efficient in states which experience wide variations
    in outdoor air temperatures and have adequate sources of ground water.
    This reoort examines the ooerntion of a g^ound-wate1, heat oumD system and
    their water temperature and volume requirements. -\lso considered ure the ground-
    water resources of Pennsylvania, specific applications of ground-water heat pumps
    and cost comparisons with other heating and cooling systems. Finally, areas of regulatory
    concern are presented for the protection of our ground-water resources.
    OPERATION
    The operation of a heat pump simply involves taking thermal energy (heat) from
    ground water and transferring it into the home during the winter months. Summer
    cooling is provided when the system puts excess heat from the home back into the
    ground water.
    The heating cycle begins when the ground water is piped through tuDes to a
    heat exchanger. Surrounding these tuoes is a container filled with a liquid refrigerant
    (freon). The freon, absorbing heat from the ground water, forms a warm gas. The
    gas is then directed to a compressor, which compresses this warm gas to a hot, denser
    gas (an average of 180°F and 2d5 pounds per square inch pressure for most models).
    The hot gas then flows to another heat exchanger, where the heat from the freon
    gas is released to air and ducted throughout the house. After this release of heat,
    the freon condenses to a liquid and is forced through an expansion device, which reduces
    the pressure and consequently lowers the temperature again. Finally, the refrigerant
    re-enters the first heat exchanger and the cycle is reDeated.
    For home cooling, the above process is reversed. The compressor sends the
    hot, dense freon gas directly to the heat exchange1*, where this heat is absorbed by
    the ground water. The refrigerant is cooled by this process. The now liquid freon
    enters a small valve leading to an expansion device, which further lowers its temperature
    and pressure. The cool liquid refrigerant flows to the second heat exchanger, where
    it absorbs heat from the air in the house. In exchange, cooler air is released and ducted
    through the house. The warmed refrigerant returns to the compressor to repeat the
    cycle.
    Vtanv of the heat pumps installed today are reversible, meaning they can provide
    cooling as well as heating. This is made possible by using a device called a refrigerant
    reversing valve, which permits the flow of refrigerant to be reversed. Some units
    may also be equtpped to provide hot water heat as an alternative to hot air. In addition,
    some units are equipped with a small heat exchanger between the refrigerant reversing
    valve and the compressor, which provides hot water for domestic needs.
    Ground water which has circulated through the heat pump on either a cooling
    or heating cycle is ready for disposal. Methods of disposal include discharge of the
    ground water into sewer systems, tile fields, ponds or the land surface. At first glance,
    these methods aopear convenient and relatively trouole-free. but their disadvantages
    - 1 -
    [3-136]
    

    -------
    nay indicate othf" ,ric"icsn' ; , 1 °:>r:v M-.v<-r wstems cannot
    handle the largo volumes 01 ivnter whic'i • _rr>» 1 ru(- ¦.«•'•-¦• 'm-hI "irns (."in orouuce ^ud
    to 7.000 gallons a day for some nrir* ':nr.«\ '';i ¦' •::)	-ew'»nic value as -veil
    as wildlife or recrentionnl usefulness, but 71 ay 'lcrsv 'tr^e -1 -cms of proDertv (not
    normally availaole in Ingnly populate '•esident,-,i iro conrre-c-nl zones) ind surface
    discharge may create bo^s, accelernte lcuc'img of pollutants nuck into the ground-
    water system, and form ice mounds m .v.nter. In >orr.e nstance*, however, ponded
    water derived from cycled ground A/iiter may .>p used for livestock Hnd farming needs.
    This method might eliminate the need for drilling a -econd well.
    The most prscticii disposal system for thp i0ed .vate-. however. is by means
    of a vertical disposal well. Ideally, this .veil jhould extend down to the snne aquifer
    from which the supply well derives its .vHter. Tins ^rictice of returning water to
    its original source is necessary for water conservation -tnd 'nsures a continuous, adeauate
    supply of ground water for heat pump ODeration. Conservation of our .vater resources
    has been especially needed in light of the near drought conditions many areas of the
    state have experienced over the past year.
    Some advantages in using h vertical disposal ".'ell include:
    (a)	it is the most efficient and economical method of rechar?ing the aauifer,
    (b)	it allows direct vertical access to the well for cleaning and injecting.
    From discussions with representatives of the water -veil industry, most ground-
    water heat pumps installed in Pennsylvania at this tune make use of a supply well
    and a vertical disposal well. The supply well may provide water for domestic needs
    as well as for the heat pump. The disposal well recycles the .varmed or cooled water
    back into the aquifer.
    Other possibilities for well design incorporating vertical recharge wells include:
    (a) us'ng a single well for supply 'inri disoosal - this method has been considered
    at times, mostly for economic reasons 'one well versus two), but research
    has shown it to be impractical in some cases. For disposal m a supply
    well, approximately 100 feet of vertical separation is required for every
    ) 2.000 BTU's of heating or cooling produced Der hour. A typical domestic
    heHt pump unit, with a 60,000 BTU capacity, would reauire 500 feet of
    separation in the well from the point of disposal to the point of supply.
    These depths may be impractical for much of Pennsylvania due to higher
    drilling and pumping costs.
    lb) incorporating a two well system and alternating withdrawal and disposal
    between the wells in winter/summer - this method could take advantage
    of any temperature variations which may exist in the ground water from
    this process. In winter, a disposal well injects cooler water back into the
    aauifer. In summer, the disposal well (now acting us a supply well) could
    withdraw this cooler water back from the aauifer for more efficient cooling.
    The second well could be used in a similar way for warmer water. Alternating
    supply and disposal may also be beneficial as a preventative maintenance
    measure. This alternation in eacn well nelDS prevent clogging of the well
    screen, a common problem. Tins method of design is rarely practiced,
    probablv due to its larger initial investment. The system would require
    

    -------
    an additional pump (one per '.vein and more piping compared to nther sv^cm.
    Due to its high efficiency, however, tins method may see future applic.stion
    in Pennsylvania, ^specially for mdustrv.
    Another method for disposal of the ground water used for heat Dumps is by mpnns
    of a horizontal dtsDosai well. This incorporates nn injection tubp inside i shallow
    well to a horizontal well system. The system can be used as a bingle-line or multiple-
    line for disposal. It is economical to install in sandy soils but is subject to plugging
    and is difficult to clean and rehabilitate. This system has seen little application in
    Pennsylvania at this time.
    WATER D EM AND
    The water demand for a ground-water heat pump will vary with size and design.
    An average domestic ground-water heat pump unit, with a heat capacity of 60,000 BTU's
    per hour, will require approximately 5 to 15 gallons per minute from a supply well
    when in operation. Average daily use on cold winter days may approach 7.000 gallons.
    If the home relies on ground water for other domestic needs as well, the system should
    be designed to handle peak water consumption.
    Most aquifers in Pennsylvania can easily meet the needs of ground-water heat
    pumps. If water quantity is inadequate, however, the system may be supplemented
    with storage tanks or more efficient heat pumps with a higher heat exchange. These
    are usually required if the well yields an average of less than five gallons a minute
    to the heat pump. Storage tanks may be located in a basement or buried underground.
    Their storage capacity should be approximately 5,000 gallons. In addition, many new
    heat pumps have higher heat exchange capacities than earlier models. This increase
    in efficiency relates to a corresponding decrease in water demand.
    WATER TEMPERATURE
    Today's ground-water heat pumps can operate efficiently at ground-water tempera-
    tures as low as 39°F. (Pennsylvania ground-water temperatures range from approximately
    48°F in the northwest to ^5 F in the southeast). Higher temoerature ground water
    will, of course, put less demand on the system and make it more efficient. An important
    point to consider is that the temperature of ground water remains relatively constant
    throughout the year. A typical air-to-air heat pump system requires the use of a
    supplemental heating system when the temperature of the outside air falls below
    a certain point (usually 20° to 35°F). Cooling a home using hot summer air also reduces
    the efficiency of the cooling unit and may require a backup cooling system. Ground-
    water heat pumps use water which remains at a constant temperature throughout
    the year and thus operate at maximum efficiency all year. A ground-water heat pump
    used for both heating and cooling will operate most efficiently where ground-water
    temperatures range from 50° to 60°F. Most ground-water temperatures in Pennsylvania
    are within this range. In addition, a 
    -------
    nnturally to springs nnd seeps into Pennsylvania streams, Ground water mav contribute
    nenrly 100 percent of total streamflow during the drier months of August through
    Octohpr.
    Currently, to 35 percent of Pennsylvania population depends on ground watpr for
    domestic needs. Twenty-one counties obtain more than half of their total water suodIv
    from aquifers, and more than 68 percent of all public water supply systems in the
    state rely on ground water for all or part of their needs.
    Ground water has often been preferred over surface water for development
    in homes or industry. Its many advantages include: low development and treatment
    costs; relatively constant yield and smddIv: constant chemical nualitv: seaiment-">ee
    nature: constant temperature; no evaporation losses; and minimal area requirements
    for development. Many of these advantages, especially ground-water's constant tempera-
    ture, are directly applicable in considering the use of ground water as a heat source.
    The demand for ground-water development will increase as our population, industry
    and per capita need for water increase. Ground water is often preferred by industry
    for cooling and processing because of its constant cool temperatures, low cost and
    sediment-free nature. Small and mid-sized communities may prefer ground water
    for their requirements due to its low development, expansion and treatment costs.
    It is likely that the use of ground-water heat pump applications will increase in areas
    where the population and industry are expected to increase. Parts of Northwestern.
    Southwestern, Southern. Central and Pastern Pennsylvania are projected areas of
    future population and industrial growth, and could see an increase in ground-water
    use as an energy source. Generally, water quantity is adeauate in these areas for
    heat pump operation although local problems may exist. If water quantity is a problem,
    the system may be supplemented with storage tanks or other equipment (discussed
    in the previous chapter).
    Ground water use may also increase in areas where surface waters are already
    polluted (most notably in the coal mining regions of the state). Ground-water supplies
    of adequate yield may be available at a cost considerably lower than that required
    to develop treatment facilities for surface water.
    Fven in areas where ground water is not of drinking water quality, ground-water
    heat pump applications are possible. The heat pump merely "borrows" the ground
    water for a time and returns it to its original source, withdrawing (or adding) only
    heat m the process, not the pollutants.
    A common ground-water quality problem in many areas of the state is high concen-
    trations of calcium, magnesium and iron. This "hard water" may form scale deposits
    in tubing and clog pipes. One way to prevent this is to install cupronickel instead
    of copper tubing. According to heat pump manufacturers, cupronickel expands and
    contracts with temperature, and its surface tends to flake off mineral and scale deposits.
    If the practice of using any polluted waters for ground-water heat pump applications
    is employed, however, it is strongly recommended that the ground water be returned,
    through a properly constructed well, to its original source. This practice will avoid
    pollution of other surface or ground waters.
    - 4 -
    [3-139]
    

    -------
    APPLICATIONS OP GROUND WATER HEAT PUMPS IN PENNSYLVANIA
    Nearly half of the energy used in the residential and commercial sectors in the
    United States goes for space heating. This represents one-sixth of total U.S. energy
    use and one-fourth of total oil and natural gas consumption. (Leon R. Glicksman,
    "Heat Pumps: Off and Running. . .Again", Technology Review. June/July 1978, pp. 64-70).
    The magnitude of this demand, coupled with rising costs or fossil fuels, makes states
    like Pennsylvania prime candidates for improved heating and cooling technologies,
    including ground-water heat pump applications.
    Individual residential ground-water heat pump systems are generally used for
    space heating and cooling. Some units may also be equipped to provide hot *ater
    for other domestic needs as '.veil.
    Another means of utilizing ground-water heat pump units for residential heating
    and cooling are district heating systems. This involves a centralized distribution of
    ground water to multiple end-users. Each end-user would use individual heat exchangers
    and compressors for their own heating and cooling needs. Common piping may be
    installed to deliver the ground water to service. Costs for obtaining, pumping, maintenance
    and disposal of the ground water can be mutually shared by all end-users.
    Since Pennsylvania is an industrial state, applications of ground-water heat
    pumps may include service water heating and process heat as well as space heating
    and cooling. Many industries have these requirements, including textiles, chemical
    products, petroleum refining, fabricated products, food products, machinery and electrical
    equipment and transportation equipment. In addition, much of the heat generated
    by industry could be recovered by ground-water heat pumps and recycled into the
    aquifer. This increase in water temperature can maximize the efficiency of the heat
    pump system and provide less costly heat when required.
    THE ECONOMICS OF GROUND-WATER HEAT PUMPS
    To evaluate the economics of a ground-water heat pump system, its initial cost
    (equipment and installation) and itc annual operating costs must be considered. The
    initial cost of the ground-water heat pump is higher than that of conventional systems,
    but its lower annual operating costs and maintenance requirements, ability to produce
    heating as well as cooling, and relative immunity to escalating fossil fuel costs make
    it economically competitive.
    According to a survey of ground-water heat pump installers in Pennsylvania,
    the initial cost of a ground-water heat pump system will vary from area to area, but
    generally approaches $6,000. This includes the cost of the heat pump itself (usually
    $2,500-53,000), a water well capable of supplying 2.S gallons of water per minute
    per 12,000 BTU's of heating or cooling produced (generally $2,300-52,700), ductwork
    in the home (approximately $400) and plumbing (usually $300-$400). Initial costs
    will be higher if two wells are employed (one for supply, one for disposal) and extra
    features such as corrosion-resistant cupro-nidcel heat exchange coils are added. Initial
    costs will be lower if one or more wells already exist on the property. This eliminates
    drilling costs.
    [3-1401"
    

    -------
    Average initial costs for conventional heating systems are lower. Some of these,
    with the cost of a cooling system included, are listed below:
    Air-to-air heat pump
    Natural gas furnace
    Electric Resistance
    Electric Furnace
    $3,500
    $2,500
    $1,500
    $2,500
    $2,700
    Propane
    The average annual operating costs of a ground-water heat pump system are
    usually much lower than conventional systems. This is due to its higher efficiency,
    since the unit simply transfers existing thermal energy from one place to another.
    The efficiency of a system may be measured by a ratio called the coefficient of perfor-
    mance (COP). The COP is simply a ratio of the amount of heat produced to the amount
    of energy required to produce that heat. The average COP for a ground-water heat
    pump is approximately 3.2, meaning that the heat pump will deliver 320 3TU's of
    heat for every 100 BTU's of electrical energy it consumes 'to operate the pump, compressor
    and blower).
    The COP of a ground-water heat pump is much higher than that of conventional
    systems. Some average COP's of those systems are listed below:
    The higher the COP, the lower the annual operating costs of the system will
    be. In comparison, 100 BTU's of energy will produce 320 BTU's of heat from a ground-
    water heat pump, but only 75 BTU's from a natural gas furnace (COP equals 3.2 and
    0.75 respectively). This reduction m annual operating costs offsets the higher initial
    costs of a ground-water heat pump system. Depending on the initial investment, the
    cost difference between the ground-water heat pump and conventional heating systems
    can usually be eliminated over a period of two to six years. After this time, energy
    savings using ground-water heat pumps are substantial.
    REGULATORY CONCERNS
    The ground-water heat pump industry is growing in Pennsylvania. While the
    concept of heat pumps is still young, however, it is important to establish a policy
    which will protect the heat pump user as well as the ground-water resources upon
    which he relies.
    Any policy concerning the use of ground-water heat pumps should address the
    specific effects of a heat pump system on ground-water quality and quantity: Do
    ground-water heat pumps cause pollution7 If so, how9 Should cycled ground water
    be reinjected or disposed of in surface waters? What are the effects of over-develop-
    ment ' These questions and others must be considered and their possible effects on
    ground-water auality and quantity should be calculated.
    It is unlikely that ground-water heat pumps themselves cause pollution. The
    units do, however, contain refrigerant (freon) and oil. It is conceivable that a rupture
    in the plumbing or an event causing a pressure loss in the system could allow the freon
    and/or oil to enter the ground-water system. Volumes of freon and oil in a domestic
    Air-to-air heat pump
    Natural gas furnace
    Electrical Resistance
    Coal Furnace
    2.0
    0.75
    0.95
    0.70
    - 6 -
    [3-14H
    

    -------
    heat pump are small, but are considerably larger with industrial units. Freon has
    a slight to moderate toxicity ^Dangerous Properties of Industrial Material. Sax, 1968),
    and the presence of even small quantities of oil in ground water mav make the water
    undrinkable.
    Uncontrolled overpumping and overdevelopment of the ground-water heat pump
    industry may cause problems such as aquifer drawdown and well interference. Aquifer
    "drawdown" indicates that more water is being withdrawn from the aquifer than is
    being replaced and usually manifests itself by smaller yields and lower water levels
    in wells. Pumping a well usually creates a cone-shaped depression of the water table
    (the two-dimensional surface representing the top of the ground water), with the lowest
    point on the cone be>ng the well location, where the watc is being pumped. With
    over-pumping, two or more closely spaced wells may see an overlapping of their individual
    cones of depression. This is called "well interference" and also is reflected by lower
    well yields, as some of the available ground water must now supply two or more wells
    instead of one. Where the water is reinjected into the same producing aquifer by
    way of the source well or a second well, no aquifer drawdown or well interference
    will occur.
    If a ground-water heat pump uses waters of low quality, contamination of shallow
    higher quality aquifers can result if the cycled ground water is reinjected into these
    shallow units. Also, surface disposal of used low quality ground waters may contaminate
    the high quality ground water and surface water.
    Even if lower quality ground waters are reinjected to their original source, problems
    can result from faulty well construction. This usually occurs due to insufficient and
    substandard well casing, inadequate seals between the well casing and borehole, and
    poor welding of casing joints.
    Other possible ground-water effects from the use of ground-water heat pumps
    concern temperature variations due to heat pump operation. Heating ground water
    may raise the temperature of surface water base flow (the ground-water contribution
    to total stream flow) to greater than 58 F. which is the limit for cold water fisheries
    in the state. This could conceivably happen, but would require large volumes of heated
    ground water. Larger industries utilizing ground-water heat pump syctems could generate
    this volume. Also, it is possible that heated discharges may raise surface water and
    ground-water temperatures for other nearby ground water users.
    In addition, discharging water either to the surface or in seepage pits in carbonate
    (limestone, dolomite) rock terrain may accelerate sinkhole activity. Returning water
    to the original aquifer in this environment, however, will lessen this effect.
    CONCLUSION
    With modern technology, ground water may now be considered an energy source
    as well as a drinking water source. Ground-water supplies do not, unlike other energy
    sources, dwindle during cold winter seasons or suffer from OPEC price increases.
    It is, like solar power, considered "free energy".
    The ground-water heat pump industry is expected to grow, as more and more
    people become aware of the advantages ground water has to offer. .Associated with
    this growth, however, should be the proper planning and increased public awareness
    needed to ensure the protection of our ground-water resources.
    - 7 -
    [3-1421
    

    -------
    Finally, the following list of DO'S and DO NTS should be taken into consideration:
    DO SEEK reputable, knowledgeable well drillers and installers.
    DO RETURN the ground water to its original source.
    DO have all wells properly constructed.
    DO report the location of your well to DER.
    DO enlist the services of a qualified hydrogeologist when designing commercial
    and industrial systems that will require a large volume of water.
    PONT USE additives which could pollute ground water.
    - 8 -
    [3-143]
    

    -------
    Legal Requirements of Water Well Dnllers
    Anyone considering installing a ground-water heat pump should be aware
    of the legal requirements of water well drillers. Act 610 of the Administrative Code,
    known as the Water Well Drillers License Act, requires all water well dnllers in the
    Commonwealth to obtain a license. This program is administered by the Department
    of Environmental Resources, Bureau of Topographic and Geologic Survey, P.O. Box 2357,
    Harrisburg, PA 17120 (Telephone: 717-787-5828). Drillers are also required to complete
    a well completion report on a form provided by the Bureau; the form calls for geologic
    data, well description data, and well use. This report is sent to the Bureau of Topographic
    and Geologic Survey. This form has copies for the well owner, driller, and the county
    or municipality in which the well is drilled. Well owners do not always receive a copy
    of the report since it is not required in Act 610. Well owners desiring their copy should
    request it from their well driller.
    For Additional Reading....
    Baldwin, H.L. and McGuinness, C.L., A Primer on Ground-Water, U.S. Geological
    Survey Special Report (1963)
    Becher, A.E., Ground-Water in Pennsylvania, Geologic Survey Educational Series No. 3
    (1978)
    Gannon, R„ Ground-Water Heat Pumps - Home Heating and Cooling from your Well,
    Popular Science, February 1978, pages 78-87
    McGuinness, C.L., The Role of Ground-Water in the National Water Situation, U.S.
    Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1800 (1963)
    National Conference of State Legislatures, Guidebook to Ground-Water Heat Pumps.
    (May 1980)
    Utah State University, Utah Water Research Laboratory, Extension Service, Mechanical
    Engineering Department, Ground-Water Heat Pump, (December 1979)
    Water Well Journal Publishing Company, 500 W. Wilson Bridge Road, Suite 130, Worthington,
    Ohio 43085, Ground-Water Heat Pump Journal published quarterly.
    [3-144]
    

    -------
    SECTION 3.2.2
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (or SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    AUTHOR:
    (or INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:
    STUDY AREA:
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES:
    Ground-Water Heat Pumps in the
    Tidewater Area of Southeastern
    Virg inia
    SMC Martin, Inc.
    June, 1983
    Southeastern Virginia
    USEPA Region III
    Not applicable
    SMC Martin, Inc. was contracted by
    EPA to develop a data base
    (inventory) and assess the
    environmental	impact	of
    groundwater heat pumps in the
    Tidewater area of southeastern
    Virginia. This report provides
    the results of the investigation
    and includes an estimate of the
    number of heat pumps m the area,
    a listing of municipal regulations
    which could affect heat pump
    installation, and regulatory
    recommendations.
    [3-145]"
    

    -------
    GROUND-WATER HEAT PUMPS
    IN THE TIDEWATER AREA
    OF SOUTHEASTERN VIRGINIA
    Prepared by:
    SMC Martin Inc.
    900 W. Valley Forge Road
    P. 0. Box 359
    Valley Forge, PA 19482
    Submitted to:
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
    Region III
    Ground-Water Protection Section
    6th S. Walnut Streets
    Philadelphia, PA 19106
    Contract No. 68-01-6288
    Task #2, Amendment #5
    Ref: #8402-040-94011
    June 7, 1983
    [3-1431
    

    -------
    TABLE OF CONTENTS
    Page
    1.0 Introduction	1
    1.1	Background	1
    1.2	Scope of work	3
    1.3	Methodology	5
    2.0 Environmental setting	7
    2.1	Physiography	7
    2.2	Hydrogeology	7
    3.0 Operational data	11
    3.1	Existing municipal regulations	11
    3.2	Inventory	12
    3.3	Discussion: Heat pump systems in the	13
    Tidewater area
    4.0 Potential environmental impacts	17
    4.1	Impacts of effluent disposal by surface	17
    discharge
    4.1.1	Ground-water depletion	17
    4.1.2	Saltwater intrusion	19
    4.2	Impacts of effluent injection	19
    4.2.1	Recharge well failure and	19
    formation plugging
    4.2.2	Thermal impacts	20
    4.2.3	Impact of a contaminated supply well 21
    4.2.4	Chemical additives	21
    5.0 Conclusions	23
    5.1	Existing regulations	23
    5.2	Construction and operation	23
    5.3	Environmental impact	24
    6.0 Recommendations	26
    References	29
    Appendices
    A Virginia Beach municipal ordinance regarding
    ground-water heat pumps
    B Summary of results of telephone survey
    C Data from telephone survey
    [3-147]~
    

    -------
    LIST OF FIGURES
    Figure
    1	Heat pump operational cycle
    2	Tidewater area of southeastern Virginia
    3	Stratigraphic and hydrogeologic units
    of southeastern Virginia
    

    -------
    1.0 -INTRODUCTION
    1.1 Background
    Ground-water heat pumps have been in use for
    residential heating and cooling since the 1950s and have
    gained in popularity over the past decade. Heat purr.ps can
    be used for both heating and cooling and are particularly
    popular in areas of temperate climate and moderate ground-
    water temperatures where both central heating and air
    conditioning are desired. Although a ground-water heat pump
    costs more initially than a conventional heating or cooling
    system, the operating costs are generally lower than for
    other systems. Because the systems often pay for themselves
    in several years, many houses are being retrofitted with
    these systems in addition to units installed m new homes.
    A ground-water heat pump system requires a water
    supply well, a small water pump, a heat pump (compressor)
    which circulates a liquid refrigerant (freon), a heat
    exchanger, a circulation system, and a discharge system. A
    schematic showing the heat pump operational cycles is shown
    in Figure 1.
    During the heating cycle, freon flows through a
    capillary tube, lowering its pressure and boiling point. As
    the freon passes through the heat exchanger, it extracts
    heat from the surrounding water, boils and vaporizes. The
    cooled water is either discharged to the surface or is
    injected into the subsurface. The freon vapor flows to the
    [3-149]-
    

    -------
    
    
    H *craicfMNT
    ~ *'•
    G»OU««0 WATU
    •CVfWlNC
    ikl-crcu
    %
    CJk^lllAUT TUBE
    IU^nr
    WATT*
    Figure 1: HEAT PUMP OPERATIONAL CYCLES
    2
    [3-150]
    

    -------
    compressor and is pumped to the air heat exchanger as a hot,
    high-pressure gas. In the air heat exchanger, the freon
    condenses and releases heat to the air which circulates
    through the home's heating ducts.
    This process is reversed for cooling, wherein the
    compressor pumps the hot freon vapor to the water heat
    exchanger, which releases heat collected from the house.
    The warmed ground-water is discharged as described above and
    the cooled, liquid freon flows through the capillary tube to
    the air heat exchanger. In the air heat exchanger, the
    freon absorbs heat from the house, vaporizes, and returns to
    the compressor, renewing the cycle. As illustrated, the
    ground water in the water heat exchanger does not directly
    contact the freon refrigerant or the atmosphere.
    1.2 Scope of Work
    In the Tidewater area of southeastern Virginia, a
    relatively small geographic area (Figure 2), the combination
    of a moderate climate, nearly constant ground-water tem-
    perature, and sufficient ground-water supplies have resulted
    in widespread use of ground-water heat pumps. Of the
    communities in this area, only Virginia Beach has initiated
    regulatory guidelines concerning the construction details of
    the heat pump system. As part of the permit conditions,
    heat pumps are required to inject the effluent via return
    wells; surface discharges are prohibited.
    The remaining communities in the Tidewater area do
    not directly regulate the installation of ground-water heat
    3
    [3-151]
    

    -------
    I	
    VIRGINIA
    CHESAPEAKE
    BAY
    HAMPTON
    NEWPORT
    — NEWS
    IOREOLK
    VIRGINIA
    BEACH
    PORTSMOUTJ
    SUFFOLK
    CHESAPEAKE
    Figure 2: TDEWATER AREA OF SOUTHEASTERN VIRG1NA
    4
    [3-152]
    

    -------
    pumps. As a result, the number of heat pumps in the area,
    along, with construction specifics and operational data, are
    largely unknown.
    Under Contract #68-01-6288, Task #2, Amendment #5,
    EPA Region III requested that SMC Martin develop an infor-
    mational data base and assess the environmental impact of
    the ground-water heat pumps in the Tidewater area of south-
    eastern Virginia.
    The scope of work for the project was revised
    during a February 2, 1983 meeting with representatives of
    EPA Region III and SMC Martin. During this meeting, it was
    determined that the investigation should primarily include:
    o Chemical contamination potential from cleaning,
    maintenance, and operation
    o Recharge problems
    o A listing of firms that install ground-water heat
    pumps
    o Regulatory recommendations.
    This report provides the results of the inves-
    tigation and includes an estimate of the number of heat
    pumps in the study area, a list of existing municipal
    regulations which could affect heat pump installation, and
    regulatory recommendations.
    1.3 Methodology
    A comprehensive telephone survey was conducted in
    order to generate a list of ground-water heat pump instal-
    lers in the Tidewater area, to estimate the number of heat
    [3-153]
    

    -------
    pumps in operation, and to obtain operational and construc-
    tioa details of the "typical" residential heat pump system.
    In the telephone survey, the following types of businesses
    were contacted:
    o Local members of the Contractor Division of the
    National Water Well Association
    o Water well drillers
    o Heating contractors
    o Water treatment contractors
    o Heat pump dealers, distributors, and installers.
    These businesses were asked about the number of
    ground-water heat pump systems they have sold and/or mstalle
    in the area, the number of recharge wells in the systems,
    and the relative proportion of residential versus nonresiden-
    tial systems. Installers were also asked to describe
    construction details of ground-water heat pump systems, in
    particular, the size of a typical heat pump, the amount of
    water required, whether the water is treated with chemical
    additives, the number of systems installed on new construc-
    tion or retrofitted to existing buildings, and any problems
    encountered with ground-water heat pumps.
    The seven municipalities in the Tidewater area
    were contacted and asked about ordinances which may affect
    ground-water heat pumps. Municipal offices which were
    contacted include the Health Department, Building Inspection
    Department, Public Works Department, Zoning, City Clerk,
    City Solicitor, and the Sanitation Authority.
    

    -------
    2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
    2.1	Physiography
    The Tidewater area lies entirely within the
    Atlantic Coastal Plain physiographic province. Deposition
    and erosion of sediments by fluctuating sea levels over time
    have created the "stair-step" topography characteristic of
    the Atlantic Coastal Plain. This consists of wide gently
    eastward sloping plains separated by linear, steeper,
    eastward facing scarps. Elevation and relief become pro-
    gressively lower, eastward through the area.
    The study area is bounded on the east by the
    Atlantic Ocean, on the north by the Chesapeake Bay, and is
    bisected by the James River. The northern portion of the
    area drains into the James River and Chesapeake Bay, while
    the southern portion is drained by long southward-flowing
    streams which discharge into the Currituck and Abermarle
    Sounds. The areas between major streams are often flat and
    poorly drained.
    2.2	Hydrogeology
    The area is primarily underlain by a wedge of
    unconsolidated sediments deposited on a pre-Cretaceous
    basement of crystalline rock. The sediments, which consist
    primarily of clays, silts, sands, gravels, and shells, form
    a wedge which thickens toward the east. The sediment
    blanket begins at the Fall Line, which marks the border
    between the Piedmont and the Coastal Plain Provinces, and
    thickens to 2400 feet at the Atlantic Ocean.
    7
    [3-155]
    

    -------
    There are four main aquifers in the Tidewater area
    {Figure 3). The water table or Quaternary aquifer extends
    to a depth of approximately 40 feet and supplies small
    amounts of fresh, nonpotable water. Water quality in this
    unit is highly variable; low pH and high iron content are
    the major quality limitations for use. Very few heat pumps
    use ground water from this aquifer. The Yorktown aquifer is
    the major potable aquifer and supplies essentially all
    ground-water heat pumps in the area. The Eocene and Creta-
    ceous aquifers supply minor quantities of fresh or brackish
    water.
    Most ground water for residential and light
    industrial use in the Tidewater area is obtained from the
    Yorktown aquifer." Beds of silt and clay and sandy clay,
    about 20 to 40 feet thick, separate the Yorktown aquifer
    from the overlying water table aquifer. Water enters the
    Yorktown primarily from downward leakage from the Quaternary
    aquifer and to a lesser extent by lateral flow from the
    west. The Yorktown formation is 300 to 400 feet thick, but
    the water-bearing portion is found in sand, gravel, and
    shell beds located in the upper 50 to 150 feet. The aquifer
    is divided into three ma^or sand units separated by silt and
    clay beds'. Domestic well yields typically range from 5 to
    50 gallons per minute. Except in areas of significant
    pumpage, the water table generally follows topographic
    trends (Siudyla et al, 1981) .
    8
    [3-1561
    

    -------
    SYSTEM
    SERIES
    STRAT(GRAPHIC
    UNITS
    NYOROGEOLOGIC
    UNITS
    DESCRIPTION Of
    HYDROGEOtOGIC WITS
    Quaternary
    RECENT
    PLEISTOCENE
    RECENT
    COLUMBIA
    GROUP
    WATER TABLE
    OR
    QUATERNARY
    AQUIFER
    Unconsolidated sand, silt, and
    some gravel. Sand units yield
    quantities adequate for domestic
    and small Industrial demands.used
    extensively for lawn watering.
    Unconfined aquifer.
    tertiary
    UPPER
    UJ
    m;
    tX
    o»
    3. 3
    YORICTOWN
    YORKTOWI
    AQUIFER
    Sand and shell beds Min water-
    bearing units. Adequate for Mod-
    erate public and industrial
    suddIies.
    Artesian
    
    ^ n ] UwL L
    S
    *
    a o
    ho ac
    u* O
    X
    UJ
    CALVEST
    COHfTKIHG
    UNITS
    Silt and clay predominant, Minor
    sand lenses
    
    EOCENE
    
    
    EOCENE-UPPER
    Glauconltlc sand and 1nterb*dded
    
    PALEOCENE
    HATTAPONI
    CRETACEOUS
    AQUIFER
    clay and sill. Infrequently used
    as a »ater supply, fields adequ-
    ate for moderate supplies.
    Brackish in Most of area.
    Artesian
    CRETACEOUS
    UPPER
    
    
    
    LOWER
    1/1
    TRANSITIONAL
    BEDS
    LOWER
    Intertedded gravel, sand, silt,
    and clay. Yields art adequate
    
    X —
    w
    z ^
    D <
    s
    w
    PATUJtENT
    CRETACEOUS
    aquifer
    for large Industrial use. Brack-
    ish in most of area.
    Artesian
    Figure 3: STRATTGRAPH1C AND HYDROGEOLOGJC UNITS
    OF SOUTHEASTERN VIRGINIA
    FROM SIUDYLA ET AL £1981)
    [3-157]
    

    -------
    Ground water from the Yorktown aquifer is generally
    of a quality suitable for residential use, though treatment
    to reduce iron concentrations is sometimes required.
    Throughout the area, the fresh water/salt water interface
    roughly parallels the shoreline. According to Siudyla et al
    (1981), "Invasion of brackish water into fresh water por-
    tions of the Yorktown aquifer due to pumping is a possi-
    bility. Intense well field development along the shoreline
    would probably result in brackish water encroachment into
    the well fields. Inland, the concern is upward movement or
    upwelling of brackish water found at about 150 feet mean sea
    level into the fresh water portion of the Yorktown aquifer."
    10
    [3-158]
    

    -------
    3.0 OPERATIONAL DATA
    3.1 Existing municipal regulations
    The code of the city of Virginia Beach (Section 37-
    18.1) (see Appendix A) requires all ground-water heat pumps
    to "return all such ground water after usage in an unaltered
    biological and chemical condition to the aquifer from which
    it was originally withdrawn" unless otherwise provided by an
    SPDES permit from the State Water Control Board. All
    ground-water heat pumps must be permitted by the Department
    of Permits and Inspections. Since the Department began
    keeping records in April 1980, 5S4 ground-water heat pumps
    have been permitted in Virginia Beach through May 198 3.
    Chesapeake has an ordinance (Chapter 38, Article II,
    Section 1) which prohibits the taking of water from a
    private well for domestic use if city water is available.
    Section 32.1-162(2) of the State Public Water Supply stat-
    utes defines household heating as a domestic use. The
    ordinance, which was adopted m 1969, was intended to
    require homeowners to hook into the city water system.
    Since the entire municipality is served by public water,
    this ordinance, in effect, prohibits the use of ground-water
    heat pumps. City officials contacted are unaware of the
    implications of this ordinance, and the ordinance is not
    actively enforced against heat pumps.
    The Hampton Roads Sanitation District operates the
    wastewater treatment facility for the entire study area
    11
    

    -------
    except a portion of Portsmouth which is not yet served by a
    sanitary sewer system. Since November 1, 1978, the regula-
    tions of the sanitation district have prohibited discharge
    of "any significant quantities of . . . ground water ... or
    any other unpolluted water" into any portion of the sanitary
    sewerage system (Part III, Section 301(E): Industrial
    Wastewater Discharge Regulations). The Industrial Waste
    Division sent a letter stating this to all heat pump instal-
    lers in the Tidewater area in 1979 and to municipal building
    and plumbing inspectors in 1982. The State Water Control
    Board must approve of all heat pump discharges to the storm
    sewer system, although permits are not required.
    3.2 Inventory
    Ground-water heat pumps have been installed in the
    Tidewater area since the 1950s and their popularity has
    greatly increased since the rise of energy costs in the
    1970s. It was not possible to contact many of the contrac-
    tors who have been installing heat pumps since the 1950s,
    since some of these firms are no longer in business.
    However, 178 heat pump contractors in the Tidewater area
    were contacted regarding the ground-water heat pump systems
    they have installed in the study area. Fifty-six contrac-
    tors reported that they have installed systems in the study
    area (Appendix B). Each contractor was asked to estimate
    the number of systems he had installed (Appendix C); these
    estimates totalled 2,678 systems. Using this approach, this
    12
    [3-130]
    

    -------
    estimate should be considered a first-cut approximation of
    the total number of heat pumps in the area. The survey
    method had no provisions for field verification of the
    installers' estimates. Also, a number of installers could
    not be reached, and many installers could only estimate the
    number of ground-water heat pumps they installed within the
    past several years.
    3.3 Discussion of Heat Pump Systems in the Tidewater
    Area
    In recent years, most ground-water heat pump
    systems have been retrofitted to existing homes and buildings.
    Although a significant number are installed in new homes, it
    does not appear feasible to estimate numbers or trends in
    ground-water heat pump installations in new homes from
    records of building permits.
    Residential ground-water heat pumps generally
    require two to three gallons of water per ton every minute
    of operation. The supply well should discharge at least 5
    to 15 gallons per minute. If this is not available, several
    supply wells may be used. Most wells in the Yorktown
    aquifer have sufficient yield to supply a ground-water heat
    pump (Siudyla et al, 1981), although many heat pump instal-
    lers and water well drillers report that insufficient yield
    is a ma3or limitation on ground-water heat pumps in some
    areas.
    The depth of both the supply and the recharge
    wells typically ranges from roughly 50 to 200 feet and
    13
    [3-161]
    

    -------
    averages approximately 80 feet. Wells can be drilled deeper
    to the west as the fresh-water salt-water interface is
    deeper further from the ocean. Nearly all ground-water heat
    pump wells are screened in the Yorktown aquifer; very few
    heat pumps are supplied by shallow (less than 40-foot) wells
    in the Quaternary aquifer. Both supply and recharge wells
    are usually drilled to roughly the same depth. Most drilling
    is subcontracted to water well drillers, although some heat
    pump contractors are acquiring their own well drilling
    capabilities.
    Most wells in the Tidewater area used in heat pump
    operations are 1-1/4 to 4 inches in diameter. The wells are
    drilled with a mud rotary drilling rig and are typically
    cased with Schedule 40 PVC casing to the total depth. The
    screened interval is typically 5-20 feet, with slot sizes
    ranging from .008 inch to .025 inch. Jet ejector pumps are
    usually used for flows under 16 gpm and in the smaller
    diameter wells; submersible pumps are occasionally used in
    the 4-inch wells.
    The vast majority of these ground-water heat pump
    systems have small heat pumps, defined as 5 tons or smaller
    (1 ton = 12,000 BTU). A 2 or 3-ton heat pump is sufficient
    for most residential applications. Large homes and buildings
    are frequently subdivided into different heating zones
    (e.g., living versus sleeping areas) and a heat pump may be
    installed for each zone. The individual heat pumps may
    14
    [3-132]
    

    -------
    operate on separate sets of wells although it is common to
    have all the heat pumps in a large building mutually connected
    to several supply and recharge wells.
    Several design options are available for non-
    residential buildings which require heat pumps larger than
    approximately five tons. Water to air heat pumps can at
    least in theory be built to any size, with the maximum size
    usually limited by the number and capacity of the supply and
    recharge wells. Ten-ton units may be constructed by pairing
    two 5-ton units, and larger units (a 20-ton unit is considered
    large) may be custom built by a contractor. The current
    trend is to combine several smaller heat pumps and to m}ect
    the effluent.
    Water to air heat pumps in many large buildings
    use drinking water from the municipal water system as a heat
    source or sink. The water is discharged to cooling or
    evaporation towers and/or the municipal sewer. These
    systems do not use any wells and are not expected to have
    any direct impact on the ground water.
    Very few water-to-water heat pumps are in use in
    the Tidewater area. In these systems, ground water is used
    as a heat source for the building's hot water heating
    system. The ground water may be discharged to recharge
    wells or to the surface. It has been estimated five or six
    such systems are in the Tidewater area, with the largest
    unit a 250-ton heat pump which discharges to a lake.
    15
    [3-163] "
    

    -------
    Recharge well failure is the most common problem
    faced by ground-water heat pump contractors and owners.
    Plugging of the well screen by silt was the most common
    failure mechanism. Some contractors reported that installing
    filters in the supply line can aid in preventing these
    problems. Thorough well development is important to prevent
    fine sediments from plugging the well screen. Some contrac-
    tors recommend pumping the recharge wells to waste on an
    annual basis.
    Ground water in the study area contains relatively
    high iron concentrations, which can contribute to well
    failure. As the ground water passes through the pump,
    dissolved oxygen in the water may oxidize the iron, resulting
    in iron oxide precipitation. Iron encrustation may build up
    within the heat pump, recharge well, or recharge aquifer.
    At least one case of iron precipitates plugging a surface
    discharge pipe was reported.
    16
    

    -------
    4.0 POTENTIAL IMPACTS
    4.1 Impact of effluent disposal by surface discharge
    4.1.1 Ground-water depletion
    Residential ground-water heat pump systems withdraw
    an average of ten gallons of water per minute of operation.
    The widespread use of these systems m conjunction with
    surface discharge of effluent, and/or injection of effluent
    to an aquifer other than the pumped aquifer, can contribute
    to ground-water depletion. In the first case, the dis-
    charged effluent will either runoff to a surface water body
    or percolate into the water table aquifer, which in the
    study area, is not widely used as a heat pump water source.
    In the second case (the injection of effluent to an aquifer
    other than the pumped aquifer), a depletion of the pumped
    aquifer can also occur. This depletion could induce salt
    water intrusions (4.1.2) and/or diminish the available
    supply of potable water.
    As previously noted, Virginia Beach has required
    injection of heat pump effluent since March 1, 1982. The
    State Water Control Board requires SPDES permits for all
    surface discharges from heat pumps. The Hampton Roads
    Sanitation District, the sewer treatment authority covering
    the majority of the study area, has prohibited the discharge
    of ground-water heat pump effluent into the sanitary sewer
    system since November 1, 1978. Furthermore, the State Water
    Control Board must approve discharges into the storm sewers.
    17
    [3-1S5]"
    

    -------
    These regulations severely limit the surface discharges from
    heat pumps but do provide for injection via recharge wells.
    Most of these wells inject into the Yorktown, the pumped
    aquifer.
    A portion of the systems which were constructed
    before these regulations went into effect do, however,
    discharge effluent to the surface. Waterfront homes
    frequently discharge to the lakes. Contacts with heat pump
    installers also indicated that there are a small number of
    systems which discharge into the public sewer system,
    although these could not be specifically identified. This
    discharging of effluent to the sewer system appears to be
    used primarily as a last resort after several attempts to
    inject the effluent have failed. Some systems do not inject
    or discharge the effluent but use all or part of it to water
    lawns, wash cars, and other non-drinking water uses. Some
    of this water will eventually reach the water table.
    Communications with various heat pump installers
    suggest that approximately 95 percent of the systems cur-
    rently installed dispose of effluent via injection wells set
    into the Yorktown aquifer. This is also the aquifer from
    which the water is drawn, thereby setting up a "closed
    circulation system" and reducing the potential for ground-
    water depletion. However, depletion could potentially
    become a problem in areas where the surface discharge of
    effluent is practiced or in areas with systems built prior
    to the aforementioned regulations.
    18
    [3-166]
    

    -------
    4.1.2 Potential for saltwater intrusion
    Extensive ground-water withdrawals have the
    potential to alter existing ground-water flow gradients. In
    areas near the ocean, this can cause intrusion of salt water
    into fresh aquifers. According to Siudyla et al (1981),
    excessive grounc-vater withdrawals from the Yorktown aquifer
    could cause lateral saltwater encroachment and upconing of
    brackish water from underlying strata. It is possible that
    ground-water withdrawals and returns could cause the fresh
    water-saltwater interface to become locally more diffuse.
    However, if essentially all the water is recharged to the
    same depth, which is generally the case in the study area,
    saltwater intrusion is not anticipated to be a serious
    problem.
    4.2 Impacts of effluent injection
    4.2.1 Recharge well failure and formation plugging
    Failure of a recharge well is a common occurrence,
    with the most immediate consequence being nuisance flooding
    of the ground surface. Once a recharge well has become
    plugged, two new recharge wells are generally constructed.
    If recharge wells repeatedly fail, effluent is sometimes
    discharged into the sewer. Interviews with heat pump
    contractors suggested that some contractors do this primarily
    as a last resort.
    A more long-term consequence of recharge well
    failure is plugging of the injection formation by precipitation
    of iron oxides or other compounds, which would interfere
    19
    [3-137]
    

    -------
    with the use of that aquifer. The likelihood of this iron
    oxide precipitation is increased if the ground water contains
    significant concentrations of iron, if air is able to leak
    into the system, or if waters from two different aquifers
    are mixed. Although the ground water in parts of the study
    area contains significant concentrations of iron, the heat
    pump systems are constructed to be airtight. The supply and
    recharge wells are generally completed at approximately the
    same depth, preventing the mixing of waters from two different
    aquifers. The heat pump contractors reported no cases of
    iron-oxide precipitation causing problems outside of the
    well bore.
    4.2.2 Thermal impacts
    The effluent from the heat pump is usually 8° to
    10 °F warmer than the influent in summer, and 5° to 10°F
    cooler in winter. The injection of ten gallons per minute
    of water of a different temperature than the ground water
    has a local effect on the ground-water temperature. This
    could impact nearby ground-water heat pumps and possibly
    have an effect on organisms in the aquifer and/or induce or
    inhibit chemical reactions (precipitation, etc.). The areal
    extent of temperature changes in the aquifer is difficult to
    estimate, although heat pump contractors and drillers
    indicated that injection of warm or cold water rarely has a
    significant effect on the temperature of the supply well.
    However, according to Mr. Spalding of Cox-Powell Corpora-
    tion, some supply wells in the shallow Quaternary
    20
    [3-168]
    

    -------
    aquifer experience a seasonal temperature fluctuation of 5°F
    or more. Wells in the underlying Yorktown aquifer have a
    larger sink and are not as sensitive.
    4.2.3	Impact of a contaminated supply well
    If the supply well of a heat pump system were
    contaminated, the injection of effluent into the aquifer via
    the recharge well could rapidly spread the contamination.
    Some water well drillers reported that they had been requested
    to drill heat pump wells in a septic system absorption
    field. In such a location, a shallow supply well could
    withdraw incompletely renovated sewage, which in turn would
    be pumped to a recharge well, and upon injection could
    overload the absorption field causing it to fail. One
    driller reported working with one or two cases in which a
    leaking residential fuel oil tank contaminated a heat pump
    system on the same property. However, each pair of supply
    anc recharge wells in the Tidewater area are generally
    drilled to the same depth. Other than the fuel oil contamination,
    contacts with installers, drillers and municipalities did
    not suggest that any serious ground-water contamination
    problems have been spread by heat pumps.
    4.2.4	Chemical additives
    One chemical problem associated with heat pumps is
    the potential for freon contamination of the ground water
    caused by a damaged and/or leaking condenser. The leaking
    would probably be detected only when the heat pump stopped
    working properly due to freezing of the condenser coils.
    21
    [3-139]
    

    -------
    Breaks in the condenser may be caused by corrosion or by
    clogging with precipitates. It was not possible to accu-
    rately determine how frequently this occurs, although it is
    not thought to be common.
    Water for ground-water heat pumps in the study
    area is generally used solely by the heat pumps and net as a
    drinking water source. The heat pump contractors surveyed
    reported that the use of chemical additives in heat pumps
    throughout this area is rare. Although ground water m some
    portions of the Tidewater area may contain high concen-
    trations of iron or total dissolved solids, treatment to
    prevent corrosion, precipitation, or algae is not commonly
    used. It was reported that one nonresidential system
    withdraws water with a pH of 5 and treats it with very small
    amounts of caustic soda to raise the pH to 6.
    The heat pump condenser is generally periodically
    cleaned by adding chemicals to remove and inhibit scale
    formation. The heat pump is shut down, the cleaner is
    circulated through the condenser, and then removed. It is
    not released into the ground water during normal operations.
    22
    [3-170]
    

    -------
    Existing regulations
    o The Virginia Beach regulations establish a
    comprehensive regulatory framework for the
    proper installation and operation of ground-
    water heat pump systems.
    o Most of the municipalities in the Tidewater
    area have not promulgated specific regula-
    tions for grounc-water heat pumps. A Chesa-
    peake ordinance by inference prohibits
    ground-water heat pumps. Several state
    regulations and municipal ordinances con-
    cerning sewer hookups and wastewater dis-
    charges discourage alternatives to effluent
    injection.
    Construction and operation
    o In general, current construction practices
    are adequate to insure safe operation of the
    system. However, significant variations in
    practices exist, and, without strict regula-
    tory controls, it is possible that some
    systems are installed which could fail and
    discharge refrigerant or chemical additives
    to the subsurface.
    23
    

    -------
    o Most systems utilize return wells for effluent
    injection. Most of the systems which dis-
    charge effluent to surface water predate the
    current trend of using injection wells,
    o Because most systems inject the heat pump
    effluent, regional ground-water depletion is
    unlikely.
    o The most common problem encountered in the
    modern systems is failure of the recharge
    wells.
    o Several options for effluent disposal are
    available; the most attractive and most
    frequently-employed option is to inject the
    effluent into the same geologic horizon from
    which it was withdrawn,
    o Effluent discharge into sanitary sewers is
    not a viable option since the effluent could
    overload the wastewater treatment plant,
    o From a purely technical standpoint, land
    application of the effluent is feasible,
    though in this area a large number of problems
    could result, ranging from runoff flooding a
    neighbor's yard, to aquifer depletion.
    5.3 Environmental impact
    o when properly installed and operated with
    efficient production and injection wells,
    ground-water heat pumps should not produce
    long-term degradation of the environment.
    24
    [3-172]"
    

    -------
    The risk of refrigerant and/or chemical
    additive losses to the environment can easily
    be minimized through the use of quality-built
    systems, and trained personnel to install and
    service the units.
    25
    

    -------
    6.0 RECOMMENDATIOKS
    o Ground-water heat punp systems should employ
    injection wells and should be closed systems,
    pressurized, and air-free,
    o A crop pipe should be used m the injection well
    to insure that effluent is injected below the
    static water level. The end of the drop pipe
    should contain a back-pressure valve to prevent
    water from draining from the drop pipe. This
    practice will minimize the introduction of air
    into the well,
    o Fluid-carrying lines and pipes should be con-
    structed of corrosion-resistant materials,
    o Policy should be established which strongly
    encourages effluent injection into the same
    horizon from which it was withdrawn,
    o If injection into a zone other than the production
    horizon is permitted, caution should be taken to
    insure that overdraftmg of the aquifer does not
    occur. The overall water quality of the producing
    zone should be equal (or better) than the water
    quality in the injection zone,
    o When feasible, pump tests should be performed to
    determine the specific capacity (yield/drawdown)
    of the return well. The specific capacity provides
    a rough estimate of the increase in water level
    26
    [3-174]
    

    -------
    expected in the return well at a given injection
    rate. Graphs relating head increase to recharge
    rate and specific capacity are given in Keech
    (1982). Marginal wells could then be redeveloped
    or modified to improve performance, reducing the
    potential for future recharge well failure.
    The Chesapeake ordinance in Chapter 38, Article II
    Section 1, should be changed to permit the use of
    private wells for ground-water heat pumps even
    where city water and sanitary sewer lines are
    available.
    Prohibit discharges of ground-water heat pump
    effluent to septic systems.
    Establish isolation distances between the supply
    and recharge well (s) and septic systems, building
    foundations, and other wells. It may also be
    advisable to establish minimum depth criteria and
    minimum well yields.
    In situations where a recharge well repeatedly
    fails, it may be advisable to permit temporary
    discharges of heat pump effluent to the storm or
    sanitary sewer system on an emergency, temporary
    basis. If this is feasible, temporary sewer
    discharges could be less undesirable than over-
    flowing recharge wells.
    27
    

    -------
    The most widespread problem associated with
    ground-water heat purips in the Tidewater area is
    recharge well failure. To minimize this occur-
    rence, the well(s) should be thoroughly developed
    before connecting it to the heat pump, a filter
    could be installed in the intake line, and the
    recharge well could be pumped to waste periodicall
    to remove accumulated silt.
    The rate of new heat pump installations will
    probably increase in the future. At present, a
    great deal of misinformation and confusion exists,
    both in the general public and in industry. The
    state and/or federal agencies should develop and
    implement a public information/education program
    to educate all parties involved with this growing
    technology.
    28
    

    -------
    REFERENCES
    Gannon, Robert. February 1978. Ground-water heat pumps -
    home heating and cooling from your own well. Popular
    Science.
    Keech, D. K. 1982. Design of heat pump return wells. Water
    Well Journal, (June), p. 32-33.
    Maryland Commission on Groundwater Heat Pumps. January 1982.
    A report to the General Assembly of Maryland in response
    to Joint Resolution No. 25 Laws of 1981.
    Old Dominion University Research Foundation. July 1982.
    Aquifer Identification and In]ection Well Inventory for
    the State of Virginia and District of Columbia. Final
    Report, Volume I. M. Hanif Chandhry, Ph.D., Principal
    Investigator. Prepared for the U.S. EPA Region III
    under Research Grant No. G003254010.
    Siudyla, E. A; A. E. May, D. W. Hawthorne. November 1981.
    Ground Water Resources of the Four Cities Area, Virginia.
    Planning Bulletin 331. State Water Control Board,
    Richmond, Virginia.
    29
    [3-177]-
    

    -------
    APPENDIX A
    VIRGINIA BEACH MUNICIPAL ORDINANCE
    REGARDING GROUND-WATER HEAT PUMPS
    [3-1781
    

    -------
    J|1	AN	A^fVD '''HE COOf: cr THE CITY
    ) ¦«'	cr VIHGXSIA 3IACR r.V AR.-I'JG SECTION 37-1C.J
    ^	RELA?I»JC TO fcATEk- T^-AIR HLAT PUKPS
    BE IT Or.CAIHEi) 3* 1'nE COWCIL Cf THE CITY OF VIRGINIA
    BEACH, VIRGINIA:
    That the Code of the City of Viroinia Beach is hereby
    amended by adcir.o the follovina Section 17-*0.1:
    Scc.ion 27-18.1. Jcr-jifir Rcc.^.arrjp Sys'.iT icojiied lot
    water-to-air heat p-rnps.
    (a)	Unless otherwise provided by the State Mater Control
    Board, all vatet-te-air heat pumps and/or oilier devices which
    utilize ?7T0«:r.£wat.er fcr purp-oses of heatinq or cooling shall be
    equipped ana installed in such a manner as to return all such
    grounJwa:ur, after us^je, in an u.-.altered biolocical and chen-i.-c.
    conditio.-. to the aauifer froa vhich it was orioinally withdrawn.
    No fcuch water-to-air heat pump or other device which
    utilizes groundwater shall be aoproved for installation unless it
    is oo designed or equipped. The site and design of ell wells
    (irittite or dis-jharee) utilized by any such water-to-air heat pump
    cr other aevic: vhich utilises grouniw-srer shall be subject to
    acpr&vtl by the Health Department.
    (b)	No property owner, lessee or other person who is in
    control of premises upon which any such water-to-dir heat puap or
    other device which utilizes groundwater located shall allow
    operation of any such puap or device in a manner Inconsistent
    with the provisions of paragraph (a) above.
    (c)'	The provisions of this section shall be administered
    and enforced by the Department of Permits and Inspections. Any
    viclsticr. -Ms oeCbiwu	conecjtuce a Class J »'irtwM-»nor.
    E&'.'h day Any violation of this section shell continue bhall
    constitute a ?e-arcte offense.
    A^cptei by the Council cf Lhe City of Vircir.ia ."\*ach,
    f
    Virginia, on	I li« First Day of Marrln 1982 «
    <- " -to rzriTvrr
    KH.VCJ Ala	:
    7/31 /a 1, F/2S/31,		.—.-TTT-.	
    Xitgii s	-rV..
    . .9l/cr.y±iM:
    [3-1791
    

    -------
    SECTION 3.2.3
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (or SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    AUTHOR:
    Report to the Wisconsin
    Legislature on Experimental
    Groundwater Heat Pump
    Injection Well Project
    Wisconsin Dept. of Natural
    Resources
    DATE:
    STUDY AREA:
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES:
    July 1, 1984
    Wisconsin
    USEPA, Region V
    Not Applicable
    The Wisconsin Department of
    Natural Resources (DNR) was
    authorized by the legislature to
    approve up to 60 heat pump systems
    utilizing injection wells. During
    the project period (1981-1983)
    only 3 systems were constructed.
    The report cites the limited
    interest in the systems ana the
    potential for groundwater contami-
    nation, and recommends that the
    project be terminated and no new
    systems allowed in the future. In
    the event that a need for such
    systems is identified in the
    future, recommendations are
    presented for the establishment of
    a regulatory program. Due to the
    length of the report, only the
    executive summary
    included here.
    has been
    [3-130]"
    

    -------
    ^A+4-ach/fle/l "J* H)
    Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
    Report to the Wisconsin Legislature
    on
    Experimental Groundwater Heat Pump
    Injection Well Project
    as required by
    Section 2038(4)C.20.L. 1981
    (non-statutory provision)
    of the 1981-33 Biennial Budget B111
    July 1, 1984
    [3-1311
    

    -------
    State of Wisconsin \ DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
    \	njtrr
    Carroll D BesaCny
    Secretary
    BOX 7921
    MADISON, WISCONSIN 53707
    File Ref
    July I, 1984
    3300
    To: Wisconsin Citizens and Legislators
    Wisconsin has an abundance of high quality groundwater. This resource,
    however, is fragile; and when contaminated due to the activities of man,
    it may take decades or centuries to purify itself, but probably can never
    be returned to its previous condition.
    In addition to the traditional uses of groundwater (drinking, irrigation,
    industrial), the resource can also serve as a source of energy. Groundwater
    heat pumps borrow energy from groundwater or lend energy to groundwater
    when operating as heating or cooling systems. These systems utilize groundwater
    to transfer or absorb heat in the heating or cooling of homes or buildings.
    The waste groundwater may then be injected into the underground aquifer
    or discharged at the surface or be recycled in a "closed loop".
    Wisconsin has had a long history prohibiting the injection of waste materials
    into groundwater. Even with the closed loop groundwater heat pump systems,
    there is the potential for contamination to reach the groundwater. Because
    of this concern, the Legislature in 1981 authorized an experimental program
    allowing a limited number of groundwater heat pump injection wells to be
    installed and requiring this report on the results of the program.
    This report concludes that there has been limited interest in the use of
    groundwater heat pumps and concludes that the potential for groundwater
    contamination still exists. Therefore, the existing prohibition against
    injection of waste should be maintained. The report does recognize that
    in the future the use of groundwater heat pumps may increase as the cost
    of conventional energy sources rise. Therefore, recommendations are made
    on how a regulatory program might be structured if and when conditions
    make such a program necessary.
    If there are any questions on the contents of this report, they should be
    directed to the Bureau of Water Supply, Department of Natural Resources.
    Sincerely,
    [3-13-
    

    -------
    Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
    Report tc the kisconsin Legislature
    on
    Experimental Groundwater Heat Pump
    Injection Well Project
    as required by
    Section 2038(4)0.20.L. 1S61
    (ncn-statutory provision)
    of the 1S61-&3 Biennial Budget Bill
    July 1, 1984
    [3-183]
    

    -------
    Table of Contents
    Paa
    Executive Summary		i
    I. Introduction
    Heat Pumps and Their Relation to Injection Wells		1
    Disposal Alternatives		1
    History of Injection Well Prohibition		2
    Description of Experimental Discharge Well Program		3
    Objectives of This Report		4
    II. Description of Heat Pump Systems	 4
    A.	Groundwater Heat Pumps	 4
    B.	Cost Savinqs	 7
    C.	Injection Well Design	 11
    III. Heat Punp Wastewater Discharge Alternatives	 12
    A.	Advantaqes of Groundwater Heat Pump Injection Wells		12
    B.	Disadvantages of Groundwater Heat Pump Injection Wells		13
    C.	Advantaqes and Disadvantages of Closed Loop Systems		15
    U.	Advantages and Disadvantages of Surface Discharge		16
    E.	Advantaqes and Disadvantages of Discharge to Soil Absorption
    Systems	 16
    IV. Heat Pump Study		17
    V. Federal Programs		22
    VI. State Government Agency Survey		23
    VII.	Environmental Concerns		24
    A.	Chemical Contamination	 24
    B.	Groundwater Recharge	 26
    C.	Thermal Contamination	 29
    VIII.	Summary and Conclusions Recommended State Program	 29
    

    -------
    Executive Summary
    The 1981-83 budget bill authorized the Department of Natural Resources to
    approve 60 qroundwater heat pump systems which inject circulated water into
    the groundwaters of the state. Any groundwater heat pumps approved under this
    project were to he monitored by the Department. A final report with
    recommendations based on the results of the project was to be submitted to the
    legislature by July 1, 1984.
    During the project period, only 6 requests for approval of groundwater heat
    pump svstpms were received hy the Department. Of the 6 systems approved, only
    3 have heen constructed and only one has been in operation for more than ^
    months. This lack of interest in the project has also resulted in a lack of
    data upon which to judqe the environmental impact of the utilization of these
    systems.
    The one operatinq system with any length of operating experience is located at
    the Hancock Experimental Station in Waushara County. Data from this
    installation was accumulated under the direction of the Wisconsin Geological
    and Natural History Survey. In general, this system did not result in any
    significant chanqe in the chemical composition of the groundwater and had
    minimal thermal effects.
    In view of the limited interest in these systems and because of the potential
    for qroundwater contamination, the report recormends that the project be
    terminated and that such systems not be allowed in the future. The approved
    experimental systems will continue to be monitored until system failure or
    environmental degradation necessitate their abandonment. In the event,
    however, a need for such systems is identified, recommendations are presented
    for the establishment of a regulatory program to control the construction and
    operation of heat pump closed-loop and injection well systems.
    i
    [3-135]
    

    -------
    SECTION 3.2.4
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    OR SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    AUTHOR:
    (or INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:
    STUDY AREA:
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    From Underground Injection
    Operations in Texas: A
    Classification and Assessment
    of Underground Injection
    Activities, Report 291
    Texas Department of Water
    Resources, Ben K. Knape
    December, 1984
    Texas
    USEPA Region VI
    Not applicable
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES:	The following section from the
    above report deals with air
    conditioning return flow wells in
    Texas. The Texas Department of
    Water Resources conducted a
    limited field investigation and an
    extensive literature survey and
    has judged groundwater heat pumps
    to have minimal contamination
    potential. Little inventory
    information is included; however,
    the report states that there are
    probably several hundred systems
    operating in Texas.
    [3-13S]-
    

    -------
    AIR CONDITIONING RETURN-FLOW WELLS
    Table of Contents
    Page
    Introduction		9- 1
    Geohydrology		9- 2
    J Construction Features		9- 2
    Operating Practices		9- 5
    i Nature and Volume of Injected Fluids 		9- 5
    Potential Problems		9- 7
    '/ Legal and Jurisdictional Considerations		9-10
    ij Concluding Statement				9-10
    References		9-11
    9-m
    [3-1871
    

    -------
    AIR CONDITIONING RETURN-FLOW WELLS
    Introduction
    Air conditioning return-flow wells are used for underground injection of water which has been
    produced from a supply well and used for heating or cooling in a heat pump Also referred to as
    "heat-pump wells.'' these are a specialized type of aquifer recharge well.
    For over 30 years, the technology has existed to use the temperature difference between ground
    water and other fluid media, such as refrigerants and air, to heat or cool homes and office buildings
    The heating and cooling systems which have been developed are commonly known as ground-water
    heat pumps.
    A heat pump is a temperature-conditioning device which transfers heat or thermal energy from
    one medium to another An example of a heat pump familiar to everyone is an air-to-air heat pump or
    "air conditioner" which heats or cools by using air both as a heat source and a heat-recetving medium
    (heat sink).
    A ground-water heat pump may use ground water as a heat source or heat sink. Ground-water
    temperatures remain very constant relative to the great variability of air temperatures in homes and
    buildings imposed by climatic conditions. A ground-water heat pump can be an effective air
    temperature-conditioning device whenever a significant differential exists between ground-water
    temperature and ambient air temperature in (he space to be "conditioned." Water is an ideal medium
    for use in heat pumps because of all ordinary substances water has the greatest specific heat. Thus it
    can both absorb and yield much more heat in calories per degree change in the temperature of the
    medium than does an equal weight of air
    The basic components of a heat pump are an evaporator, a condenser, a compressor, and an
    expansion valve. Figure 9-1 diagrams a ground-water heat pump refrigeration loop. The heat pump
    consists of a closed loop containing a refrigerant which alternates between liquid and gaseous
    phases. For heating buildings, the refrigerant in the gaseous phase is compressed and condensed to a
    liquid phase, yielding heat which may be used to warm the air which circulates through a building.
    Next, the compressed liquid refrigerant is jetted through an expansion valve into an evaporator,
    lowering the liquid pressure, and absorbing heat from the ground-water source, to cause the
    evaporation of the liquid once again to a gaseous phase.
    In order for a heat pump to work properly, the heat source (ground water) temperature must
    exceed the refrigerant evaporation temperature. Therefore, the efficiency of heat pumps increases
    with the differential between ground-water temperature and refrigerant evaporation temperature In
    yielding heat to the refrigeration loop, ground water is decreased in temperature by about 7 to 10°F m
    the heat-pump systems investigated by the Department When a heat-pump system is used for
    cooling buildings, heat is absorbed into the refrigeration loop from the air inside a building, and
    transferred to ground water. The general effect of air conditioning return-flow wells is to locally
    increase ground-water temperatures in the receiving aquifer when the system is used for cooling
    buildings, and to decrease ground-water temperatures when the system is used for heating
    buildings
    9-1
    [3-138]
    

    -------
    The scope of the Department's investiga-
    tion of heat-pump wells included the inven-
    tory of 29 .heating and cooling well systems
    (Figure 9-2) and an extensive literature
    review The inventory consisted of field loca-
    tion and inspection of five wells in Blanco
    County and five wells in Montgomery County
    Locations of other heat-pump wells were ob-
    tained through water well drillers and heat-
    pump contractors. Water samples were
    obtained from three wells in The Woodlands
    in Montgomery County Two wells in William-
    son County were investigated in November
    1980 by William P Overesch of the Depart-
    ment. Those locations and water sample anal-
    yses are included tn this report The literature
    was researched to determine how heat-pump
    well systems work, their various applications, ground-water contamination potentials, and out-
    look for their future development.
    Geohydrology
    More than 50 percent of the total surface area of Texas is underlain by major or minor
    aquifers (Figures 2-3 and 2-4) In addition to the delineated major and minor aquifers, there are
    other smaller aquifers which yield small to moderate quantities of water locally. The development
    of ground water from all of the State s aquifers has progressed rapidly during the past half
    century Future development of this valuable natural resource may involve large quantities of
    ground water for cooling in summer and heating in winter Tables 2-2 and 2-3 provide brief
    descriptions of the major and minor aquifers of the State, listing approximate thicknesses,
    geologic ages, and water-bearing properties.
    The efficiency of a ground-water heat-pump system is largely determined by the temperature
    of the supply water Shallow ground-water temperatures correlate fairly closely with mean
    annual air temperatures for particular locations (Figure 9-3) Near-surface ground-water temper-
    atures in Texas typically range from a low of about 60°F in the northwest corner of the Panhandle
    to a high of about 80°F in the lower Rio Grande Valley Below a few hundred feet in the
    subsurface, ground-water temperatures begin to be influenced by normal geothermal gradients
    which result from the inherent heat of the earth.
    Construction Features
    Two basic construction designs of air conditioning return-flow wells are shown in Figures
    9-4 and 9-5. Designs of return-flow wells are essentially the same used for the heat-pump supply
    wells. Diameters of these wells normally range from 3 to 10 inches for heat-pump systems for
    single-family dwellings. Well diameter should be determined by water disposal requirements.
    Where large amounts of water must be disposed of, as with heat-pump systems for large
    buildings, increasing well diameter will yield a corresponding increase in well capacity. In
    9-2
    [3-139]
    War*
    input
    I
    Figure 9-1 —Basic Components of a Ground-Watar
    Heat-Pump Syttam
    

    -------
    contrast, small-diameter wells are relatively economical to drill and construct. Small-diameter
    wells, however, tend to have more problems from sand plugging the wellbore.
    
    
    
    	.	
    r-	""1""""	x_,- 	- •
    
    '3
    EXPLANATION
    2 NianMr at tmttntnti
    milt m csuity
    Figure 9-2.—Inventoried Air Conditioning Return-Row Wells
    Well depths are determined by the presence of porous and permeable water-bearing strata
    suitable for storing the injected water. Wells in The Woodlands residential development in
    Montgomery County which were inventoried by the Department have an average depth of about
    200 feet. These wells inject into watar-bearing sands of the Gulf Coast aquifer In contrast, two
    wells inventoried in Williamson County in central Texas are completed in the Edwards aquifer
    with total depths of about 400 feet.
    Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe is most commonly used for well construction because it is
    economical, suitably durable, and corrosion resistant. Another material often used in heat-pump
    system wells is galvanized steel. Following casing installation, the wells are either completed
    with an open hole through the disposal zone in hard competent formations such as limestone, or
    9-3
    [3-190]
    

    -------
    with well screen and gravei pack in unconsolidated sand formations. Careful slot size selection is
    necessary to achieve optimal well performance in terms of maximum water flow with a minimum
    influx of solids from the formation into the wellbore.
    Figures.9-6 and 9-7 show the general simplicity of wellhead installations for heat-pump
    system supply and injection wells. Submersible pumps may be installed on both wells in the
    system to enable seasonal reversal of well functions. The systems investigated by the Depart-
    ment, however, used pumps only on the water-supply wells.
    
    Figure 9-3.—Average Annual Temperature (°F), 1951-80
    The literature on the subject of air conditioning return-flow wells includes designs for
    horizontal injection wells in which the heat-pump discharge water is dispersed through a
    horizontally emplaced well screen into the soil. These wells function best in sandy soils, and
    because a trench must be dug to install the horizontal well screen, the wells are necessarily very
    shallow. No such wells have been inventoried by the Department.
    9-4
    [3-1911
    

    -------
    PVCpiH-l
    Ground Imi
    
    
    
    ' • J'.V. / -
    
    
    
    I
    I
    I
    
    Opon hoi*—j-
    Vs.
    , C«m»nt (2* slab a» surfacil
    v/,
    I;
    Sm#-.-
    
    limtitono
    Figure 9-4.—Air Conditioning Raturn-Flaw Wall
    ~•sign for Stona Formation
    f»VC pipt-
    Ground livol
    Ctmtnt (2* on nfact)
    
    
    T
    Umtslont-
    K v s«nd-
    Figurt 9-6.— Air Conditioning Ratum-FIow Wall
    Daaign for Sand Formation
    Well placement is an important consider-
    ation with ground-water heat-pump systems.
    If one aquifer is used for both supply and injec-
    tion, the wells need to be spaced so that the
    temperature front traveling from the injection
    well does not reach the supply well, affecting
    supply water temperature and reducing heat-
    pump efficiency. Figure 9-8 shows a system
    using a single aquifer. If two aquifers are
    used, one for supply and one for injection,
    wells can be spaced closer together, since the
    injected water will be stratigraphically iso-
    lated from the system supply water. Being
    able to use closer well spacing is an advantage
    on small residential lots. A diagram of a two-
    aquifer system is shown in Figure 9-9.
    Operating Practices
    The basic energy requirements to run a
    ground-water heat-pump system consist of
    electric power to operate the heat-pump com-
    pressor and submersible pumps for the supply
    and injection wells. Incorporation of a refrig-
    erant reversing valve in the heat pump allows
    the functions of the various elements in the
    system to be reversed seasonally to increase
    efficiency of heating and cooling. Also, pumps
    on both supply and injection wells allow the
    operator to backwash either well to remove
    sediment which may hamper well performance. None of the heat-pump systems investigated by
    the Department, however, are seasonally reversed, but instead accomplish satisfactory hf»atina
    and cooling with a single direction of ground-water circulation.
    The most common causes of diminished well. performance involve occlusion of the wellbore
    by sediment or other debris, particularly in the screened j>r .open-hole completion interval. To
    remedy sand plugging problems, wells may be backflowed. bailed, or jetted out. Also, wells may
    be chlorinated as needed to control algae and other biological organisms which may find favor-
    able conditions for growth in the thermally altered water of heat-pump wells.
    Nature and Volume of Injected Fluids
    Standard chemical analyses and heavy-metal analyses of water samples from eight air
    conditioning return-flow wells are presented in Tables 9-1 and 9-2. Wells 1 and 2 are in the town
    of Round Rock in southern Williamson County. Wells 3 through 8 are in The Woodlands in central
    Montgomery County. Each injection (return-flow) well sampled is completed in the same aquifer
    that furnished the water supply for the heat-pump system.
    9-5
    13-192]-
    

    -------
    Figure 9-6.—Wellhead of Heat-Pump System Supply Well. Montgomery County
    Figure 9-7.—Wellhead of Heat-Pump System Injection Well, Montgomery County
    9-6
    [3-193"]
    

    -------
    Analyses of samples from wells 6 and 7
    show lead concentrations in excess of U.S.
    Environmental Protection Agency standards
    for drinking water. However, there is insuffi-
    cient historical ground-water data for the area
    to document the earlier presence of high con-
    centrations of lead. At least one well driller
    experienced with air conditioning return-flow
    wells in Montgomery County has indicated in
    conversations with Department staff that
    these occurrences of lead in the ground water
    predated the use of heat-pump wells, and that
    the ground water has not been used as a
    source of drinking water. Department Report
    136 on ground-water resources of Montgo-
    mery County (Popkin, 1971) indicates that cor-
    rosive (acidic) ground waters are found in the
    county in the Gulf Coast aquifer. These waters
    may corrode pump parts, plumbing fixtures,
    and iron casings in less than a year of contact.
    The PVC pipes used for the heat-pump wells
    are chemically nonreactive to such corrosive
    ground water. However, the metallic compo-
    nents of heat pumps may possibly be suscepti^
    ble to corrosion and dissolution into the
    ground water under such conditions. The
    potential for contributions of metals to the
    acidic ground water by heat pumps is judged
    to bejio greater than that for conventional domestic plumbing, and very small compared to the
    contributions which may have resulted from oil field activities in the immediate area. Production
    from the Conroe oil field has occurred over past decades during which time discharges of
    produced brines, drilling muds, and industrial chemicals to pits dug into sandy soils were
    commonplace.
    On the Gulf Coast, inventoried heat-pump wells serving single-family residences operate at
    rates up to about 20 gallons per minute. In central Texas, a larger-scale heat-pump system which
    is planned for an office building is designed for a ground-water flow rate of up to 50 gallons per
    minute.
    Potential Problems
    The potential for contamination of ground water resulting from introduction of pollutants
    through air conditioning return-flow wells should be very low when wells are properly cased and
    fomented. Properly designed systems are, in effect, closed loops inaccessible to contamination
    from surface pollutants.
    If ground water has been contaminated at some time prior to heat-pump use. such contami-
    nation could, however, spread from the location of the water supply well to the location of the
    9-7
    Supply Mil
    Srounrt
    I ml
    
    
    | Ctmtnt ilak^^
    
    
    '/A •: a«. . "g
    
    
    1
    I
    wammsmi
    i "
    i
    
    |g | J i | |
    i ! i
    1 ^ 1
    
    I
    ¦
    't
    ... 	*
    an |
    *.V . ; ]
    :. WeU unem-
    H
    i
    
    I L.
    rr
    Figure 9-8.— Ground-Water Heat-Pump System
    Ufing Singla Aquifer
    0«eo aquifer well Shallow aquifer wefl
    Ground | | Cjm»m uat> | |
    KZZ3	
    i" : J
    I-
    ¦i !¦
    §—
    
    
    Sm*
    nit
    i ma ^ i i i L i i i i r
    i V il It i i i "rT i11 i1
    • - " —I S3 ^Pian • • .
    Strut
    Figure 9-9.— Ground-Watar Haat-Pump System
    Using Two Aquifer*
    [3-194]
    

    -------
    Table 9-1 — Chemical Analyaea of Water Samples From
    Air Conditioning Return-Flow Well*
    (Constituent concentration* are in mg/l except specific conductance and pH )
    Wall
    u>
    03
    Data ol callaaion
    lamp °F
    °C
    pH
    Spaciltc conducianca
    miciomhoa II 26°C|
    Diaaolvad aolklt (ium|
    Baton IB)
    Silica |Si|
    Calcium (Ca)
    Magnaalum (Mg|
    Sodium |Na)
    Caibonala (CO))
    Bicarbonate (HCOj)
    Sullala ISO4)
    ChkMida |CI)
    f luorida (FI
    Nut aia (NOi)
    Now 6 I860
    ae
    60S
    306
    t2
    7fl
    23
    13
    8
    sis
    23
    14
    1 4
    < O*
    Nov 6 1980
    86
    610
    316
    12
    SO
    22
    12
    6
    328
    21
    13
    I 3
    < 04
    Mil 8 1882
    72
    22 2
    74
    664
    384
    21
    Mar 8 1982
    72
    22 2
    76
    634
    364
    I)
    Mai B 1982
    70
    21 I
    8 3
    288
    218
    < 02
    Mai 8 1882
    78
    26 6
    7 1
    Mai 8 1982
    78
    28 I
    7 2
    Mai 8. 1882
    77
    26 0
    8 2
    Walla I and 2 aia in lha town ol Round Rock in aoulhain Williamaon County and in|act into lha f dward* aquifw al a dopth ol appioxmatsly 400 laal
    Walla 3 through 8 aia in Tha Woodlanda in cantral Monigomaiy County and mjaci into lha Gull Coaal aquiloi al a dapih ol appioimaialy 200 laal
    Analytai v>aia pailormad by lha Ia«aa Siaia Oapailmant ol lltalth
    W
    I
    
    -------
    Table 9-2.—Haavy Metal Anayses of Water Samples From
    Air Conditioning Return-Flow Wells
    (Constituent concentrations are measured in mg/1.)
    	w*j	
    	9	 	7			8
    Data of collection	Mar. 9. 1982	Mar 8. 1982	Mar 3. 1982
    Arsanic (AsHmg)	<01	<01	<01
    1
    Sarium (Bal	<5	<5	<5
    Cadmium (Cd)	<01	<01	<01
    Coposr (Cu)	180	073	< 028
    Chromium (CO	<02	<02	<02
    Iron (Fa)	026	022	< 02
    lead (Pb)	4	07	<05
    Manganese (Mn)	<02	<02	<02
    Mercury (Ha)	< 0002	< 0002	< 0002
    Nickel (Ni)	<02	<02	<02
    Selenium (Sel	< 002	< 002	< 002
    Silver (Ag)	<01	<01	016
    Zinc (Zn)	.240	.14	02
    WMIs S inrougn 0 are in Tho Woodland* in Cmmrgi Monlgomery County and m/ma into tho Gulf Coast aquifar at a daptn of appromimaiafcr
    200 IM.
    Anaiyte* war* performed by tfte Taut Stale Qaoanmam of Haattfi
    injection well Similarly, when the wells in a heat-pump system are completed in different
    aquifers, water from an already contaminated aquifer mayjntroduce pollutants to an uncontarm-
    nated aquifer The practice of seasonally reversing the functions of heat-pump wells, however,
    would tend to limit the spread of new contamination in an aquifer In any instance where a
    heat-pump injection well spreads pollutants from an existing contaminated aquifer, the injection
    well could be baclcflowed to partially recover the contaminated water.
    Other concerns associated with air conditioning return-flow wells involve the effects of
    thermal atteranan on an aquifer's hydrologic properties. Thermal alteration of an aquifer_could
    theoretically generate adverse impacts such as precipitation of mineral salts. Salt precipitation
    could clog pores in an aquifer, leading to inhibited ground-water movement and decreased well
    effectiveness. The solubility of common salts, however, is highly dependent on the degree of
    acidity of a solution, and only to a lesser extent on temperature. Heat-pump systems do not affect
    the pH of an aquifer. Thus, at the 7 to 10°F differential between supply water and heat-pump
    discharge water common for the systems which the Department investigated, any impact from
    changing the solubility of salts in an aquifer should be noticeable only over extremely long periods
    of time, and localized to areas of significant well development.
    9-9
    [3-196]
    

    -------
    It should be noted that thermal alteration of an aquifer will also influence the ability of an
    aquifer to transmit fluid, because of the inverse relationship between temperature and fluid
    viscosity. That is, as ground-water temperature is elevated, viscosity of ground water decreases
    and the aquifer transmits fluids more easily. Although changes in individual well performance
    could be observed, no significant hazard would result from aquifer transmissivity changes
    induced by ground-water heat-pump systems.
    Several studies have been accomplished using computer modeling to simulate thermal
    impacts on an aquifer used m a heat-pump system (Andrews. 1978: Schaetzle and Brett, 1979).
    Factors taken into account in the computer models include rates of ground-water movement,
    amounts of thermal energy added or subtracted in the system, and inherent thermal properties of
    the aquifer All studies concluded that, particularly where air conditioning return-flow wells were
    restricted to areas of low population density, thermal alteration of aquifers would likely be of
    minimal proportions and not likely to produce adverse effects.
    Legal and Jurisdictional Considerations
    Air conditioning return-flow wells are included in the Class V category of injection wells.
    These wells are presently authorized by rules of the Department.
    The thrust of any new regulatory program for heat-pump system wells should be directed at
    large-scale systems involving one or more wells operating to heat or cool multi-unit residential or
    office complexes, schools, and hospitals. Because of their assessed low potential for causing
    ground-water problems, heat-pump systems for single-family dwellings should probably be given
    a lesser priority for regulation. The distinguishing criteria for large-scale versus small-scale
    systems would be based primarily upon ground-water pumping rates. For all ground-water
    heat-pump systems, the Department would continue to inventory the wells, and maintain oppor-
    tunity for review of project proposals for the purpose of issuing permits as necessary to protect
    water resources
    Concluding Statement
    The Department has conducted a limited field tnvestigation and an extensive literature
    review of air conditioning return-flow wells. The total number of such wells in the State is
    probably on the order of several hundred. Ground-water heat-pump systems have demonstrated
    an increased efficiency over conventional systems in heating and cooling single-family dwellings
    and larger buildings. The number of heat-pump system wells is expected to increase greatly in the
    future with ever-growing incentives to cut home and office heating and cooling costs by using less
    expensive forms of energy. The potential hazards to ground water from heat-pump systems have
    been judged to be minimal.
    9-10
    [3-197]
    

    -------
    References
    Andrews, C. B., 1978, The impact of the use of heat pumps on ground water temperatures:
    Ground Water, v. 16, no. 6 (Nov.-Dec.), p. 437-443.
    Connelly, Jack, 1980, Ground water heat pumps in Wisconsin: Water Well Journal, July 1980.
    Water Well Journal Publishing Co., Worthington, Ohio, p. 49.
    Davison, R. R„ 1975, Storing sunlight underground: Chemical Technology, v. 5, Dec. 1975,
    American Chemical Society, p. 736-741.
    Gass , T E . 1982, The thermal impact of heat pump operation Water Well Journal, Mar 1982.
    Water Well Journal Publishing Co., Worthington, Ohio, p. 42-43.
    Gass, T. 6., and Lehr, J. H„ 1977, Ground water energy and the ground water heat pump: Water
    Well Journal, Apr. 1977, Water Well Journal Publishing Co., Worthington, Ohio, p. 42-47
    Hildebrandt. A. F , Gupta, S D., and Elliot. F. R„ 1979, Groundwater heat pump HVAC demonstra-
    tion project, phase I—design development: Texas Energy Advisory Council, Houston, Texas,
    93 p.
    Lehr, J. H , 1982, Two pumps in every yard: Water Well Journal, Mar 1982. Water Well Journal
    Publishing Co., Worthington, Ohio, p. 8.
    McCray, Kevin, 1980, How heat pump manufacturers view the industry: Water Well Journal, July
    1980, Water Well Journal Publishing Co., Worthington. Ohio, p. 53-59.
    Miller, Jim, 1980, The legal implications of ground water heat pump use. Water Well Journal,
    July 1980, Water Well Journal Publishing Co.. Worthington, Ohio. p. 66-73.
    National Water Well Association, 1980a, Environmental aspects of a ground-water source heat
    pump pamphlet.
    	1980b, Mechanics of a ground-water source heat pump: pamphlet.
    Popkin, 8 P . 1971 Ground-water resources of Montgomery County, Texas. Texas Water Devel-
    opment Board Report 136. 131 p.
    Ruesink. L. E., ed., 1978, Storing blue northers: Texas Water Resources, v. 4, no. 4, Texas A&M
    University, College Station, Texas.
    Schaetzle, W J. and Brett. C. £., 1979, Heat pump centered integrated community energy
    systems, system development: University of Alabama interim report, Argonne National
    Laboratory
    Smith, A. E.. 1980. Ground water geothermal effluent disposal methods- Ground Water Heat
    Pump Journal. Fall 1980, Water Well Journal Publishing Co.. Worthington, Ohio, p. 14-17.
    9-n
    [3-198]
    

    -------
    Stiilman, D. I., Uhl, V. W., and Warfel, M. R.. 1982. Application of a ground-water source heat
    pump at the Prudential energy project. Princeton, New Jersey: Paper presented at The
    International Ground-water Geothermai Heat Pump Conference. Columbus. Ohio, Feb. 7-8,
    1982.
    

    -------
    SECTION 3.2.4
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    OR SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    AUTHOR:
    (or INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:
    STUDY AREA:
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    From Underground Injection
    Operations in Texas: A
    Classification and Assessment
    of Underground Injection
    Activities, Report 291
    Texas Department of Water
    Resources, Ben K. Knape
    December, 1984
    Texas
    USEPA Region VI
    Not applicable
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES:
    The following section from the
    above report deals with air
    conditioning return flow wells in
    Texas. The Texas Department of
    Water Resources conducted a
    limited field investigation and an
    extensive literature survey and
    has judged groundwater heat pumps
    to have minimal contamination
    potential. Little inventory
    information is included; however,
    the report states that there are
    probably several hundred systems
    operating in Texas.
    [3-13S]"
    

    -------
    SECTION 3.2.5
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (or SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    AUTHOR:
    (or INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION:
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    Summary of Heat Pump/Air
    Conditioning Return Flows from
    Various State Reports
    Engineering Enterprises, Inc.
    November, 19 86
    Not applicable
    Not applicable
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES:
    Case studies
    Minnesota,
    s umma r i z ed.
    from Massachusetts
    and Oregon a r
    

    -------
    MASSACHUSETTS
    Heat pump/air conditioning return flow wells are exempt from
    the discharge permit program if the flow does not exceed 15,000
    gallons/day. Two wells were chosen by Massachusetts to use for
    assessment purposes. Because they are closed circuit wells con-
    tamination potential of the site specific wells has been ranked
    as "very low." The only expected change in water characteristic
    and quality is a temperature change depending on season and use.
    Massachusetts rates these injection wells overall as having
    "moderately low" contamination potential.
    The two wells selected for review in Massachusetts are
    located at the North Shore area in Ipswich and southeastern
    Massachusetts in Seekonk. Both systems serve private residences
    and are currently active. In the Ipswich system the supply and
    return wells are in the same aquifer at 39 feet below grade. The
    nearest drinking water well is 250 feet upgradient and serves the
    residence; at Seekonk the supply water comes from a bedrock well
    605 feet deep (with a pump set at 250 feet). The nearest
    drinking water well is over 1, 000 feet away, and this residence
    is supplied with municipal water. The spacing between supply and
    discharge points for both systems is between 200 and 250 feet.
    Neither system introduces additives, and the units are designed
    for temperature changes between 10 and 15°F.
    The Ipswich system's return flow well is completed at a
    depth of 30 feet and returns- 11, 520 gpd of heat pump effluent.
    There is no information on casing or grouting available. Aquifers
    [3-201]
    

    -------
    in the area include thin deposits in till materials and small to
    moderate supplies in stratified deposits. Information from the
    site indicated clay materials were present above the water-
    bearing strata suggesting confined or leaky confined aquifer
    conditions.
    The Seekonk system's return flow well is completed at a
    depth of 19 feet and returns 2, 500 gpd of heat pump effluent.
    There is no information on casing or grouting available. Aqui-
    fers in this area consist of poorly drained glacial tills mant-
    ling area bedrock. The water table is generally 10-15 feet be]ow
    grade but can be as deep as 25 feet. Most water supply wells are
    finished in bedrock with depths in the hundreds of feet.
    MINNESOTA
    Holiday Inn
    The Holiday Inn in Winona, Minnesota has utilized ground-
    water in its air conditioning cooling system since 1965. Rein-
    jection has been used to dispose heated waters during the summer
    air conditioning season. This facility utilizes two separate
    withdrawal and injection systems: one for the administration
    building and one for the motel building.
    Groundwater at about 50° - 54°F is pumped from a withdrawal
    well through a condenser and discharged to another well at about
    75°F (during peak summer loads). According to the Holiday Inn
    this water originally was returned to an injection well at the
    same spot, but this caused some problems. The driller stated
    that the injection well caused "boiling" of the water around the
    [3-202J
    

    -------
    pilings. Within a year the injection system was changed to 20-
    foot dry wells located 150 feet from the source.
    The original system consisted of a 6-inch diameter supply
    well, 31 feet deep (including 10 feet of screen), and an
    injection well, 62 feet deep (with 20 feet of screen), located on
    the east side of the building. Wells for the system located on
    the north side of the building were installed 20 feet deeper with
    20 to 30 feet of separation between supply and injection wells.
    The area lithology consists of 20 feet of blue muck/clay ovei 140
    feet of sand and grave].
    While the Holiday Inn has indicated that the systems have
    operated without problems for 15 years and that groundwater
    temperatures in source wells have not risen, the driller has
    indicated that a house 150 feet northeast of the motel had its
    shallow water well heat up so much that they connected to city
    water.
    El Presidente
    The El Presidente Apartments, constructed in 1962 in
    Minneapolis, Minnesota, utilize groundwater in their air
    conditioning system. The system operates by bypassing the
    heating system's boiler in the summer and circulating cold well
    water for air conditioning.
    Groundwater is withdrawn from two 6-inch diameter wells
    finished in the St. Peter Sandstone. It is pumped into a water
    pressure tank before cooling water and domestic water are
    [3-203]"
    

    -------
    separated. The flow of water to the air conditioning system is
    controlled by a modulating valve, and temperatures in the water
    are raised only 3°F during use. This heated water is discharged
    into a 300 foot deep, 4-inch diameter injection well finished in
    the Shakopee Dolomite. This system is completely sealed, and no
    additives are used.
    The system is designed for a maximum of 50,000 gpd. No
    confirmation on the operational status of this system was
    available.
    Southdale
    The Southdale Shopping Center in Edina, Minnesota has used
    groundwater in its central cooling plant since 1956. Reinjection
    was used in 1956 and discontinued in 1957 after the reinjection
    well became plugged and overflowed.
    The system consists of two supply wells, 442 and 452 feet
    deep, which withdraw water from the Jordan Sandstone. Each well
    pumps at about 800 gpm. The 52° - 54°F groundwater passes
    through precooling units and the central cooling plant where the
    temperature is raised 20°F. It is then pumped to the package
    units in individual stores where condensors raise the temperature
    another 10°F. The water is then discharged to a stilling pond.
    Originally the heated water was injected into a 177 foot deep
    well which terminated in glacial sands and gravels. The system
    design was for 400 gpm injection at 95°F during the summer and
    800 gpm at 60°F in the winter.
    [3-204]"
    

    -------
    Because of serious plugging problems, reinjection was dis-
    continued. It was speculated that plugging was caused by iron
    precipitation. During injection, there was often a strong sul-
    furous odor in the mall. Quality analysis of withdrawal water
    did not show high iron or sulfate content (0.1 and 21 ppm respec-
    tively). These analyses may have been in error because the water
    is very hard (270 mg/L as CaCo-j). Since the halt of reinjection,
    the well has been used as a supply well. The yield has steadily
    improved through continued use. This is to be expected as the
    plugged aquifer gradually opens up.
    OREGON
    In Oregon, 11 wells are used or have been used to dispose of
    groundwater used to heat or cool office buildings in the downtown
    business district of Portland. These wells were drilled prior to
    1960 and range in depth from 158 feet to 930 feet.
    The city of Portland is underlain by two water bearing rock
    units: the Columbia River Basalt, a 700-500 feet thick rock unit
    consisting of a series of basalt lava flows with sedimentary
    interbeds between the flows; and the Troutdale Formation, a water
    bearing unit of semi-consolidated gravels and sands ranging from
    a few feet to 235 feet thick. There is a thick mudstone unit
    between the Columbia River Basalt and the Troutdale Formation
    called the Sandy River Mudstone. The Sandy River Mudstone forms
    an effective aquiclude over the Columbia River Basalt making the
    Columbia River Basalt a confined aquifer and the Troutdale
    Formation an unconfined aquifer. The chemical quality of water
    [3-205]
    

    -------
    from the Troutdale Formation is generally good, although in some
    wells there is evidence of contamination with small amounts of
    organic chemicals. The chemical quality of the Columbia River
    Basalt, on the other hand, is low, and some wells penetrating
    this aquifer have been abandoned due to high mineral content.
    Operators of heat pump/air conditioning return flow wells in
    downtown Portland utilize a variety of withdrawal and injection
    schemes in their systems. Some operators withdraw and inject
    water in a single formation while others withdraw from the
    Troutdale Formation and return to the Columbia River Basalt (and
    vice versa). Most operators have found the low chemical quality
    of the Columbia River Basalt unacceptable and threatening to the
    quality of water in the Troutdale Formation. This concern has
    since been reevaluated as the Oregon Department of Environmental
    Quality indicated in their Dec. 1986 Report on Class V
    Injections. The re-evaluation concluded that the Basalt Aquifer
    has higher quality water than the unconfined Troutdale formation.
    No data on the volume, temperature, or water quality were
    presented in the two Oregon reports. The assessment portion of
    Oregon's preliminary report states that beat pump/air
    conditioning return flow wells may contaminate aquifers in the
    following ways: (1) temperature changes; (2) chemical changes
    due to mixing water from different aquifers; and (3) chemical
    changes due to chemicals added to the water as it circulates
    through the system.
    [3-20S]
    

    -------
    S.G. Brown in 1963 stated that water from a cooling system
    reached temperatures as high as 12 0°F. This water was used in a
    system which injected to the Columbia River Basalt Aquifer whose
    natural temperature ranges from 54° to 70°F. This well was
    pumped 3 years later, and the temperature of the water initially
    recovered was as high as 76°F.
    The practice of taking water from the Columbia River Basalt
    Aquifer and recharging it to the Troutdale formation became a
    problem soon after these air conditioning systems weie put into
    use in Portland. The higher amount of sodium, calcium, anc
    chloride and the greater hardness in water from the Basalt
    Aquifer began to raise the levels of these elements in water frcrr.
    the Troutdale Formation when the Basalt Aquifer waters were
    injected to the Troutdale Formation.
    In a personal communication from Bill Bartholomew (Oregon
    Water Resources Department) to the Oregon Department of
    Environmental Quality in 1982, it was noted that sodium phosphate
    was added to waters used in these systems to reduce scaling, and
    hypochlorites were added to act as anti-bacterial agents. In
    addition, the communication noted that most of these systems were
    not closed. This probably resulted in contamination of the
    receiving aquifer.
    In regard to air-conditioning return flow wells, the Oregon
    Department of Environmental Quality had four recommendations for
    the construction and operation of heat pump air-conditioning
    return flow wells. They are as follows: (1) monitor the
    [3-207?
    

    -------
    temperature and quality of waters prior to injection, (2) keep
    records on the volumes of water injected, (3) construct systems
    so that the mixing of waters from the Troutdale Formation with
    waters from the Columbia River Basalt is avoided, and (4) do not
    inject waters from the Columbia River Basalt to the Troutdale
    Formation.
    [3-208]
    

    -------
    SECTION 3.2.6
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (or SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    AUTHOR:
    (or INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION:
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES:
    1981 Inventory of the Utilization
    of Water-Source Heat Pumps in the
    Conterminous United States
    A.N. Turcan, Jr., Judith R. Bond,
    and Genevieve Canbre
    1984
    Not applicable
    Not applicable
    This report was prepared for the
    Louisiana Department of Natural
    Resources (DNR). The purpose of
    the study was to assess the future
    impact of groundwater heac pumps
    in Louisiana. The report consists
    of an inventory of systems in che
    continental U.S. and summaries of
    state regulatory programs.
    Responses were received from
    forty-one scaces.
    

    -------
    1981 INVENTORY
    OF THE UTILIZATION OF WATER-SOURCE
    HEAT PUMPS IN THE CONTERMINOUS UNITED STATES
    by A. N. Turcan, Jr., Judith R. Bond,
    and Genevieve Cambre
    
    
    • • ••' »'•« V*.	v.. Vv-	 ¦ . ¦ i.'.
    	T-?''T-¦*:^r.o¦«>»>			 " " ""
    
    -. V; ••••¦¦• •-¦;• ••>• - • •
    Department of. Natural Resources
    "ivi	V:	Louisiana Geological Survey
    ''.-v: '.v	-i-v'	-V' ""***	•' Baton Rouge 1984
    S" •' ':'v'f	;VV-Q/¦" : . frwa
    

    -------
    1981 INVENTORY OF THE UTILIZATION OF
    WATER-SOURCE HEAT POMPS IN THE CONTERMINOUS UNITED STATES
    by
    A. N. Turcan, Jr.. Judith R. Bond, and Genevieve Cambre
    Resources Information No. 6
    Department of Natural Resources
    Louisiana Geological Survey
    Baton Rouge
    1984
    [3-21T]
    

    -------
    CONTENTS
    Page
    PREFACE 		v
    ABSTRACT	vii
    INTRODUCTION		1
    Purpose and Scope 			1
    Methods of Investigation 		2
    SUMMARY OF REPLIES		1
    Arizona		4
    California 		4
    Colorado 		S
    Connecticut		6
    Delaware 		6
    Florida 		7
    Idaho 	10
    Illinois 	11
    Indiana	11
    Iowa 	12
    Kansas 	13
    Louisiana 	14
    Maine	- . . . .	15
    Maryland 	15
    Massachusetts	15
    Michigan 	16
    Minnesota	16
    Mississippi 	17
    Missouri 	17
    Montana	17
    Nevada 	18
    New Jersey	19
    New Mexico	19
    New York	19
    North Carolina 	20
    North Dakota 	20
    Ohio 	21
    Oklahoma 	21
    Oregon 	22
    Pennsylvania 	22
    South Carolina 	23
    South Dakota 	23
    Tennessee	24
    Texas	24
    Utah 	25
    Vermont	25
    Virginia 	26
    Washington 	26
    West Virginia 	27
    Wisconsin	27
    Wyoming	29
    lii
    [3-21Z]
    

    -------
    Page
    Summary of Nationwide Findings	29
    Inventory 		30
    Source of Water and Method of Disposal	31
    Problems Associated with Water-Source Heat Pump Systems ....	31
    Regulation of Water-Source Heat Pump Systems	33
    APPENDIXES
    A.	Cover letter and questionnaire sent by the Louisiana Geological
    Survey, Department of Natural Resources
    B.	Selected letters from states
    C.	Selected guidelines, policy statements, regulations, legislation,
    and bulletins
    IV
    [3-2131
    

    -------
    PREFACE
    In order to assess the future Impact of water-source heat pump systems
    in Louisiana, the state conducted an inventory of the types of systems in use
    in other states and inquired about problems associated with their use and
    regulatory programs that have been enacted to control problems. This study
    was initiated by the Louisiana Geological Survey, Department of Natural
    Resources (DNR), to serve the needs of the Underground Injection Control
    (UIC) Program of the Office of Conservation. DNR. The Office of Conservation
    was granted regulatory authority over Class I. II, III. and V injection wells
    by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency in April 1982. It, therefore,
    has regulatory authority over the return wells utilized in some water-source
    heat pump systems.
    Toward this end, the Louisiana Geological Survey hired A. N. Turcan,
    Jr. (P.E., M.P.H., Registered Engineer. Louisiana No. 4682) to direct the
    - study, summarize the findings, and make recommendations to the state
    concerning the regulation of these systems in Louisiana. This work was done
    under DNR contract 22013-82-01. Mr. Turcan wrote:
    The consultant wishes to thank the Louisiana Geological Survey,
    DNR, and the Office of Conservation. DNR, for the opportunity to
    participate in the compilation and evaluation of information and
    documents received from other states.
    Energy needs are one of the foremost concerns of the nation but
    the need for assurance that the availability of "safe or healthy"
    drinking water is not being endangered and limited is of greater
    concern. Present and potential sources of drinking water must be
    quantitatively evaluated so that "water use" priorities can be
    established and the effects of increased ground-water pumping can
    be predicted. Conservation practices as well as safe environ-
    mental practices should be emphasized to assure a long-term supply
    of drinking water and to prevent pollution.
    Interstate technology transfers should be encouraged to eliminate
    interstate conflicts over water use, overuse of ground water, and
    to prevent pollution. Informational and educational programs
    should be fully implemented to assure public awareness of the
    "pro and cons" connected with the use of water-source heat pumps.
    v
    [3-214]
    

    -------
    The consultant recommends, for reading, the May 1980 U.S. Depart-
    ment of Energy report entitled "Ground Water and Energy,"
    CONF-800137 summary.
    ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    The state of Louisiana and, in particular, the Louisiana Geological
    Survey. Department of Vatural Resources, thank each state and the agency in
    each state for responding so promptly and effectively to Louisiana's request.
    Thanks are due to each agency for their input and excellent cooperation.
    J. R. Bond
    Louisiana Geological Survey
    vi
    [3-215]
    

    -------
    ABSTRACT
    A nationwide survey of water-source heat pumps (Hawaii and Alaska not
    included) was conducted by the Louisiana Geological Survey, Department of
    Natural Resources, in August 1981. Forty-one states responded to the
    questionnaire requesting information about the use of heat pumps, the dis-
    posal or reuse of processed water, problems with supply or return wells, and
    the development of guidelines, regulations, or legislation.
    Most of the states indicated that heat pumps were in use, although 12 of
    the 41 states reported that the number of installations was unknown, and
    almost half of the responding states had 100 or fewer installations. Twenty-
    three states reported ground water as the exclusive water source for heat
    pumps. Return to aquifer and release to surface appeared to be equally
    popular methods of dealing with the spent water; however, the use of a closed
    system to recycle spent water was limited. Approximately half of the states
    mentioned problems with the return or supply wells. Thirteen states reported
    that they either had or were developing guidelines, regulations, or
    legislation.
    Although they are an increasingly popular means of heating and cooling
    buildings, water-source heat pumps represent a new technology, and informa-
    tion about them was limited or unavailable in some states. Hence, the
    findings of this survey should be viewed as conservative.
    vii
    [3-215]
    

    -------
    INTRODUCTION
    PURPOSE AND SCOPE
    The purpose of this report is to present the results of a survey conduc-
    ted by the Louisiana Geological Survey, Department of Natural Resources
    (DNR). Forty-one states responded to a letter and questionnaire (Appendix A)
    requesting information by mid-August 1981 on the use of water-source heat
    pumps, method of disposal or reuse of the processed water, problems, and
    information on guidelines, regulations, laws, policy procedures, and other
    relevant information and comments.
    A water-source heat pump is a system which includes a source of water at
    a temperature higher or lower than the air temperature of the structure to be
    heated or cooled, a heat exchanger, pumps, and a place or process whicn
    disposes of, stores, or recycles the water after it has passed through the
    heat exchanger. Such systems are beginning to replace conventional heating
    and cooling technology in parts of the country where they are reportedly more
    economical. The Louisiana Geological Survey was seeking information about
    the most utilized sources of water (water well or public supply) and the
    means of processing the spent water (return to aquifer, release to surface
    water, or recycling via storage in a tank or closed well underground).
    Recause the Office of Conservation, DNR, has regulatory authority over return
    wells as Class V wells under the Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program,
    the state was particularly interested in any problems other states had with
    this method of disposal. Like other states with UIC delegation. Louisiana
    has three years to assess ground-water contamination potential and adopt
    whatever regulatory programs it deems necessary. The state was interested in
    learning whether other states had enacted legislation or adopted regulations
    or guidelines for return wells and water-source heat pumps in general.
    1
    

    -------
    Comments by letter and answers to the questionnaire were assembled, by
    .state agency and by state, and are summarized in this report. Letters from
    agencies in several states that supplement replies to and comments in the
    questionnaire are included in Appendix B. Copies of guidelines, policy
    statements, laws, or regulations provided by several states are included in
    Appendix C. Unfortunately, some legislation, reports, and documents were too
    long to be reproduced- These papers are mentioned in the section "Summary of
    Replies," and copies may be obtained by directly writing to that state. The
    section "Summary of Nationwide Findings" presents the overview.
    The combination of the summary and the information in the appendixes
    provided input and ideas to Louisiana, which had recently completed its own
    inventory and assessment of water-source heat pump use in the state. The
    results of the Louisiana study and the consultant's recommendations for
    regulation of water-source heat pumps in Louisiana, based on his findings
    in the state and the information from other states summarized in this report,
    are in a separate report which was prepared for the DepJfTtment of Natural
    Resources. This report may be published at a later date; information about
    Louisiana in that report is summarized in the following section.
    METHOD OF INVESTIGATION
    The Louisiana Geological Survey wrote to the conterminous 48 states
    requesting information on the utilization of water-source heat pumps. The
    letter and questionnaire (Appendix A) were sent to several agencies in each
    state who were identified, by a telephone survey, to have interest and/or
    responsibility for the use of heat pumps and disposal practices. This
    information was important in evaluating Louisiana's needs and also aided in
    the assessment of heat pump use, disposal methods, and the development of the
    consultant's recommendations.
    2
    [3-213]
    

    -------
    Replies from 41 states, including Louisiana and several agencies in some
    states, were received. Because of the differences in responsibilities and m
    experience and expertise, replies from the several agencies in the same state
    varied and thus required careful evaluation. In several instances, follow-up
    letters were sent or telephone calls were made to replying agencies in order
    to avoid anv misunderstanding.
    SUMMARY OF REPLIES
    Forty-one states responded to the Louisiana Geological Survey's letter
    and questionnaire. The number of replies, as well as the importance of their
    content and suggestions, provided Louisiana with information that was
    invaluable in the effort to assemble guidelines and recommendations for the
    wise use of water-source heat pumps in the state. In its letter requesting
    information from each state, the Louisiana Geological Survey offered to share
    the results with other states. Hopefully, this effort will encourage more
    interstate communication and interstate transfer of technology.
    The comments and answers are presented in this section by state and by
    agency in each state. For the sake of brevity, some replies were edited
    slightly and paraphrased. It is hoped that this did not change the meaning
    of the reply. If additional information on the activity or plans of an
    agency in a state are needed, the address of the state agency is given.
    The comments vary by state and, in some instances, by agencies in the
    same state. These variations were caused primarily by a difference in
    experience and expertise, responsibilities, and changes in state policy and
    attitudes as the use of heat pumps increases.
    The reader should keep in mind that the comments are based on replies
    that reflect conditions as of the period August-October 1981. An asterisk
    3
    [3-219]
    

    -------
    has been placed by those agencies that have or share regulatory responsi-
    bility for heat pumps and/or activities that affect heat pump utilization.
    Thi* rondor should ulso refer to tho dncinnnnls in Appendix C, which includes
    policy statements, rules, guidelines, and l.iws. All offer some excellent
    ideas.
    ARIZONA
    Department of Water Resources"
    99 E. Virginia Avenue
    Phoenix. AZ 85004	
    Less than 100 heat pump supply wells were known to be in use in Arizona.
    Although no problems were reported, there was concern about the possibility
    of thermal pollution and an increase in total dissolved solids; however, this
    concern was minimal because of the limited number of systems in use.
    Ari/.onn. a water appropriation regulatory state, regulates and permits
    water use through the Department of Water Resources (Appendix B). Injection .
    wells are the responsibility of the Bureau of Water Quality Control:
    Bureau of Water Quality Control*
    Department of Health Services
    1740 West Adams
    Phoenix, A7, 85007
    CALIFORNIA
    Water Resources Control Roard
    P.O. Box 100
    Sacramento. CA 95801	
    As of September 1981 (Appendix B). the use of ground-water heat pumps
    .vas rare, thus, little or no information had been assembled on their utility.
    Legislation specifically regulating water-source heat pumps had not yet been
    considered necessary. Such regulations would probably encompass the exper-
    tise and regulatory responsibilities of several state agencies.
    4
    [3-220]
    

    -------
    Chapter 10 of the (California) Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control
    Act (January 1981) states in part (Article 3, Section 13750) that "every
    person who hereafter intends to dig, bore, or drill a water well or a
    cathodic protection well or who intends to deepen or reperforate any such
    well, or to abandon or destroy any such well, shall file with the department
    a notice of intent ..." This notice provides the state agency the oppor-
    tunity to review a proposed operation prior to installation.
    COLORADO
    Department of Natural Resources*
    Division of Water Resources
    Room 813
    1313 Sherman Street
    Denver. CO 80203	
    As of October 1981, eight ground-water source installations returned
    water to the subsurface, and four installations discharged onto the surface.
    Although no problems were noted, requests for supply wells were denied "a
    couple of times because the proposed wells were near hot springs and there
    was a fear of decreasing their flow." Permits are usually approved unless
    the use of the well may have an adverse effect on other water needs. The
    Colorado Department of Natural Resources regulates the use of ground-water
    heat pumps by requiring permits to drill all wells. A disposal permit must
    be obtained from the Department of Health.
    As of September 1981, the following state agency planned to publish in
    four to six weeks a pamphlet describing heat pumps and their potential use in
    Colorado:
    Department of Natural Resources
    Colorado Geological Survey
    '715 State Centennial Building
    1313 Sherman Street
    Denver, CO 80203
    5
    [3-221]-
    

    -------
    CONNECTICUT
    Connecticut Health Department*
    79 Elm Street
    Hartford, CT 06115
    The Health Department is involved with heat pumps in that the water used
    must meet quality standards and a "separating distances requirement" pertain-
    ing to public water-supply wells as per the Public Health Code of the State
    of Connecticut.
    Department of Environmental Protection*
    Water Compliance Unit
    State Office Building
    Hartford. CT 06115	
    The Department of Environmental Protection regulates all ground-water
    and surface-water discharge. As of September 1981, about 20 installations
    that returned water to the subsurface were in use and 10 installations
    discharged onto the surface. The state's applicant guidelines for heat pump
    discharge is included in Appendix C.
    Reportedly, a heat pump system pumping 700 gallons per minute developed
    problems with iron bacteria and was pumping sand. Sand chlorination and
    filters were used to solve these problems.
    DELAWARE
    Office of Sanitary Engineering*
    Department of Health and Social Services
    Division of Public Health
    P.O. Box 637
    Dover, DE 19901 	
    The Office of Sanitary Engineering reported that state regulations
    require well permits for construction and that water must be returned to the
    aquifer.
    6
    [3-222]
    

    -------
    Department of Natural Resources
    and Environmental Control
    State of Delaware
    P.O. Box 1401
    Dover. DE 19901	
    The Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control stated
    that guidelines and regulations were in use. At the time of the survey,
    eight applications were waiting for approval by the Board of Health.
    Approval by the Board of Health is necessary when public water is available
    in order to ensure that there is no cross connection between the public
    supply and the ground-water source for the heat pump.
    Seven installations had been approved. Six of these injected into the
    subsurface; however, in one instance the injection well would not disperse
    the return water into the aquifer, and the contractor constructed a drain
    field so that the return could seep into the subsurface.
    Department of Health and Social Services*
    State of Delaware
    Division of Public Health
    Office of Sanitary Engineering
    P.O. Box 637
    Dover. DE 19901
    The Department of Health and Social Services reported that 10 systems
    were in use and returned water to the aquifer. It also stated that regula-
    tions require well permits for construction and that the water must be
    returned to the aquifer.
    FLORIDA
    Department of Environmental Regulation*
    State of Florida
    Twin Towers Office Building
    2600 Blair Stone Road
    Tallahassee. FL 32301
    The Department of Environmental Regulation reported that no state agency
    has the responsibility of ground-water heat pumps. However, this agency is
    7
    [3-223]"
    

    -------
    responsible for preventing ground-water pollution and consequently has
    control of injection /return wells.
    This agency reported that, in some cases, the supply well and injection/
    return well were too close, which tends to reduce the efficiency of the
    system. In some cases, the return well had been opened to dispose of waste
    water and hazardous waste.
    St. Johns River Water Management District
    P.O. Box 1429
    Palatka. FL 32077	
    In a letter dated August 13, 1981, the St. Johns River Water Management
    district reported that ground-water heat pumps "were rapidly increasing
    throughout the district and in some areas constituted] as much as 30$ of
    total ground water used by an individual county" (Appendix B). A recent
    report from this district entitled "Annual Water Survey, 1979" stated that
    180 million gallons of ground water per day was used for 16,000 heat pumps in
    one county. Most of this water was discharged onto the surface. This
    district also reported that discharge from the systems was contaminating
    "shallow supplies" and the "resources integrity [had] been diminished due to
    the large concentration of users." (Included in Appendix B with this
    district's letter is page 25 from St. John's River Water Management District
    Technical Report No. 10.)
    South Florida Water Management District
    P.O. Box V
    West Palm Beach, FL 33402	
    The South Florida district "does not regulate wells - Regulatory
    programs in ground [are] confined to water use - not water pumped."
    3
    [3-224]
    

    -------
    Northwest Florida Water Management District
    Route No. 1, Box 3100
    Havana. FL 32333	
    The Northwest Florida district reported "some subsidence associated with
    large municipal wells injecting into shallow strata" (Appendix 8). The
    district also stated that because of the surface geology most of the water
    discharged onto the surface "is returned indirectly through percolation;
    therefore, consumptive use will probably never be a concern."
    Southwest Florida Water Management District
    5060 U.S. Highway 41, South
    Brooksville, FL 33512	
    The Southwest Florida district reported 5000 heat pump systems that
    returned water to the aquifer and another 2500 installations that discharged
    water onto the surface. This district includes a 16-county area. Report-
    edly, some returned air-conditioned water had caused the aquifer to build up
    heat in excess of 105° F. This buildup in isolated areas was not considered
    a widespread problem.
    Suwannee River Management District
    Route 3, Box 64
    Live Oak, FL 32060	
    The Suwannee district reported 75 installations that returned water to
    the aquifer and 25 installations that discharged water onto the surface
    (Appendix B). The only problem had been the placement of supply and return
    wells close to each other so that efficiency losses resulted from a reduced
    thermal gradient.
    9
    [3-225]'
    

    -------
    IDAHO
    Department of Water Resources*
    State House
    Boise, ID 83720	
    The Department of Water Resources is responsible for regulating
    ground-water use, but has no specific guidelines, regulations, or legisla-
    tion relating to heat pumps. However, some ground-water heat pumps using
    low-temperature geothermai water could be subject to some provisions of the
    state's geothermai law. There are adequate state rules and regulations for
    disposal wells. As a western state, Idaho has had very strong water-use
    appropriation laws, but to date the state has not required separate permits
    for domestic heat pumps.
    Idaho Office of Energy
    State House
    Boise. ID 83720
    In its reply to the questionnaire, the Idaho Office of Energy wrote that
    "although numbers were not available, ground water source heat pumps were in
    use and either returned water to the subsurface or onto the surface."
    Department of Health and Welfare
    Division of Environmental and
    Water Quality Board
    State House
    Boise. ID 83720	
    The Department of Health and Welfare estimated that less than 100
    installations were in use; these installations discharged water to the
    surface. It is possible that some heat pumps using high-temperature water
    could be subject to some provisions of the state geothermai law J The agency
    was also of the opinion that adequate regulations and rules for disposal
    wells already exist. \s a western state, Idaho has strong water appropria-
    tion laws that do not require separate permits for domestic "space" heating.
    10
    [3-22S]
    

    -------
    EG & G Idaho, Inc.
    P.O. Box 1625
    Idaho Falls. ID 83415
    According to EGtfi Idaho, the u^e of heat pumps in Idaho will increase
    (Appendix 3). Several institutions, including schools, had installed water
    heat pumps, and several other schools were considering the possibility.
    ILLINOIS
    Environmental Protection Agency*
    State of Illinois
    2200 Churchill Road
    Springfield, IL 62706	
    The letter from the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency explained
    that because an inventory was underway as of August 5, 1981. the number of
    heat pumps was unknown (Appendix B). The agency expected to complete the
    inventory in 1 or 1-1/2 years.
    Illinois State Water Survey
    605 East Springfield Avenue
    P.O. Box 5050, Station A
    Champaign, IL 61820	
    The State Water Survey provided a rough estimate of 10 to 40 installa-
    tions returning water to the aquifer, 5 to 10 installations using a closed
    type of system, and 30 to 60 installations discharging water to the surface.
    INDIANA
    Indiana State Board of Health*
    P.O. Box 1964
    Indianapolis. IN 46206	
    The Stream Pollution Control Agency is responsible for regulating the
    impact of heat pumps on ground-water and surface-water quality. The number
    of heat pump installations and problems with them had not been inventoried by
    this agency.
    11
    [3-227]
    

    -------
    Indiana Department of Natural Resources*
    Division of Water
    Room 605, State Office Building
    Indianapolis, IN 46204	
    This department estimated that, as of September 1981, 100 installations
    returned water to the subsurface and 400 discharged water onto the surface.
    IOW\
    Iowa Natural Resources Council*
    Henry A. Wallace State Office Ruilding
    Pes Moines, IA 50319	
    The Natural Resources Council reported that the exact number of instal-
    lations was unknown. The only problems encountered were the plugging of
    return wells and inadequate spacing between wells, which caused "some inter-
    ferences between wells." As the use of heat pumps increases, these problems
    may become more common.
    Iowa Natural Resources Council Rule 455A applies to the supply and
    return of injection wells, and a permit is required to store, divert, or
    withdraw water. The following are sections 3.1(4) and 3.1(6) of Rule 455A
    that apply, for the most part, to heat pump operations.
    3.1(4). Under storage or disposal. A permit for the diversion
    of water or any material from the surface directly into any
    underground water course or basin shall not be granted except
    upon proof provided by the applicant that the requested diversion
    is fully safe, will not contaminate the aquifer utilized and is
    approved by the Iowa Water Quality Commission.
    3.1(6). Closed cooling systems. A permit shall not be granted
    for the withdrawal ot ground water for use solely as a coolant in
    a closed system without returning such ground water to the
    aquifer from which it came unless applicant demonstrates
    compelling reasons for not returning the water.
    12
    [3-223]
    

    -------
    Department of Environmental Quality*
    Henry A. Wallace State Office Building
    Pes Moines. IA 50319	
    This department will probably have co-responsibility for regulating heat
    pump operations.
    Iowa Geological Survey
    123 North Capital Street
    Iowa City, 1A 52242
    The Iowa Geological Survey had been studying thermal contamination and
    reported thermal problems when return wells were used (Appendix B). The Iowa
    Extension Service was preparing a brochure on the use and design of ground-
    water heat pumps.
    KANSAS
    Department of Health k Environment*
    Forbes Field
    Topeka. KS 66620	
    The Kansas Department of Health and Environment, along with the state's
    Bureau of Oil Field and Environmental Geology, will be responsible for
    regulating ground-water heat pumps. Guidelines were being developed and an
    inventory of wells was to begin in August 1981.
    This department reported (August 1981) the following types of disposal
    activities: 60 installations returning water to aquifer, 4 installations
    returning to a closed system or swimming pools, and 20 installations
    discharging water to the surface.
    The major problems associated with heat pump installation were that
    return wells were not being constructed properly and were not capable of
    handling the return flow. iMany plugged due to particulate matter and fine
    sand. Another problem was incrustation due to iron and manganese in the
    water. Because of poor development, many supply wells pumped fine sand.
    13
    [3-229}
    

    -------
    LOUISIANA
    Louisiana Geological Survey
    University Station, Box G
    Raton Rouge. LA 70393	
    In its inventory and assessment, the Louisiana Geological Survey learned
    that about 300 water-source heat pumps were in use as of October 1981. Of
    this total, no more than 10 heat pumps were injecting the waste product into
    the subsurface, and 2 or 3 were using the closed-loop system. The remainder
    discharged onto the surface and into swimming pools, ponds, sewers, ditches,
    and so on. Louisiana has no law, regulation, or rule limiting or controlling
    the use of water. Recommendations were made for the development of guide-
    lines that would apply to water use and waste disposal.
    Department of Natural Resources*
    P.O. Box 44396
    Baton Rouge. LA 70804	
    As stated in a letter dated April 12, 1982, from the Legal Division of
    the Department of Natural Resources (DMR), the Office of Conservation (DNR)
    has jurisdiction over subsurface injection, and the Office of Environmental
    Affairs (DNR) has jurisdiction over surface discharge from heat pumps
    (Appendix B). In April 1982, Louisiana received primacy delegation for the
    U1C program. The Attorney General of Louisiana rendered a legal opinion that
    fluid from a heat pump installation is a waste product (Appendix B).
    Department of Health and Human Resources*
    P.O. Box 3776
    Baton Rouge, LA 70821	
    This department, through the provisions of the Sanitary Code of
    Louisiana, can take action to regulate or eliminate activities that may
    endanger health.
    14
    [3-230]
    

    -------
    MAINE
    «
    Department of Environmental Protection
    State House Station 17
    Augusta. ME 04333	
    This agency was to be responsible for regulating water-source heat
    pumps. No installations were known to exist in Maine.
    MARYLAND
    The John Hopkins University
    Applied Physics Laboratory
    John Hopkins Road
    Laurel, MP 20810	
    The Applied Physics Laboratory provided general information on the use
    of heat pumps in Maryland and stated that many eastern states are now having
    to write regulations for heat pumps (Appendix B). The university suggested
    the development of a manual for architects, builders, and users of heat pump
    systems.
    MASSACHUSETTS
    Department of Environmental Quality
    Engineering
    1-11 Webster Street
    Boston. MA 02110	
    The Department of Environmental Quality Engineering, along with the
    Division of Water Pollution, reportedly will regulate the use of water-source
    heat pumps based on legislation recently passed. As of September 1981, 38
    installations were in use, all of which use ground water and return water to
    the subsurface through leaching.
    15
    [3-23T1
    

    -------
    MICHIGAN
    Water Resources Commission
    Chairman
    Executive Office
    Department of Natural Resources
    P.O. Box 30028
    Lansing. MI 48909	
    Although water-source heat pumps were reported to be in use, an inven-
    tory had not been made. The water or waste from the installation was
    reportedly returned to the aquifer or discharged on the surface. Mo problems
    were noted.
    The Water Resources Commission issued a policy statement on heat pump
    practices (Appendix C) and stated that heat pump facilities with a heat
    exchange capacity or 120,000 Btu per hour or less will not be required to
    have a discharge permit, provided no chemical additives axe used in the
    system. Systems with a heat exchange rate greater than 120,000 Btu per hour
    or_ systems with a smaller rate that propose to use chemical additives must
    file for a discharge permit.
    MINNESOTA
    Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
    193S West County Road B2
    Roseville. MN 55113	
    As of September 1981, the number of ground-water heat pumps in Minnesota
    was unknown. Recent legislation allowed the installation of up to 210
    systems with the reinjection to the supply aquifer through a program
    administered by the Department of Health. Permit applications for discharg-
    ing to the surface are under the control of the Pollution Control Agency.
    Aside from these systems, ground-water injection in general is prohibited
    through separate regulations of the Pollution Control Agency and the
    Department of Health.
    16
    [3-232]
    

    -------
    The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources must approve the issuance
    of a water appropriation permit if the supply well yields 10,000 gallons or
    more per day. Minnesota's rules for heat pump use are in Appendix C.
    There had been no attempt to identify problems associated with the use
    of water-source heat pumps.
    MISSISSIPPI
    Department of Natural Resources
    Bureau of Land and Water Resources
    P.O. Box 10631
    Jackson, MS 39209	
    This department reported that it had not yet (August 1981) inventoried
    the use or impact of water-source heat pumps.
    MISSOURI
    Department of Natural Resources*
    P.O. Box 176
    Jefferson City, MO 65102	
    Included in Appendix B is a letter from this department dated August 18,
    1981. that summarizes the use of heat pumps in Missouri. Missouri House Bill
    No. 1614 (1978) permits only single residential heat-pump installations.
    MONTANA
    Department of Natural Resources
    and Conservation
    Energy Division
    32 South Ewing
    Helena. MT 59601	
    At the time of the survey, the utilization of heat pumps was "relatively
    new" in Montana (Appendix B) and the market was "not large enough" for
    17
    

    -------
    problems to have developed. Closed-loop systems were in the experimental
    stage, and emphasis was on developing interest in ground-water heat pump
    systems primarily as an energy conservation goal.
    Of the 10 installations using ground water and known to exist, 6
    returned water to the aquifer, 2 stored water in a tank underground, and 2
    discharged onto the surface. In addition, there were 2 closed-loop systems,
    and 2 installations used public water supply and discharged onto the surface.
    The state's regulatory responsibility by category is as follows:
    Water-use permits	Department of Natural Resources and
    Conservation
    Discharge permits	Department of Health and Environmen-
    tal Sciences
    Return or injection permits-- Department of State Lands
    Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology
    Montana College of Mineral Science
    and Technology
    Butte. MT 59701	
    Replies indicated that potential problems with surface disposal may
    increase stream temperature and adversely affect fish. No problems had yet
    been noted.
    NEVADA
    Department of Environmental and
    Natural Resources
    Division of Environmental Protection
    Capital Station
    Carson City, NV 89712	
    The Division of Environmental Protection regulates discharge to the
    subsurface and surface. The Division of Water Resources (Office of the
    State Engineer) regulates water rights and withdrawal permits. There are no
    regulations that specifically apply to water-source heat pumps.
    18
    [3-234]
    

    -------
    Some wells were used as "noncontact" cooling water for commercial
    buildings and returned water to the same aquifer. Some geothermal wells were
    used to heat houses and commercial buildings by use of "in well heat
    exchanges or flow through heat exchanges" with return to the same aquifer or
    discharge to a storm drain.
    NEW JERSEY
    Division of Water Resources*
    Department of Environmental Protection
    P.O. Box CN 029
    Trenton. NJ 08625	
    The Water Allocation Office of this state agency has the responsibility
    for regulating water-source heat pumps. As of September 1981, there were 79
    "cooling return wells" registered with the state. The agency believed that
    there were more, but they had not yet classified them as to use or method of
    disposal.
    NEW MEXICO
    Health and Environmental Department
    P.O. Box 968
    Santa Fe. NM 87503	
    The State Engineer appropriates water rights in New Mexico. Few systems
    (11) were reported to have been installed. Specific laws and regulations for
    heat pumps had not been developed. A major problem seemed to be the short
    life of return wells.
    NEW YORK
    Department of Environmental Control
    50 Wolf Drive
    Albany. NY 12233	
    As of September 1981, no state agency had specific responsibility for
    regulating heat pumps. Consequently, the number of heat pumps and associated
    19
    [3-235i
    

    -------
    problems were not reported. The reporting agency stated that persons in New
    York City used heat pumps in summer and that "suspected contamination was
    caused by pumping and not returning [waterl causing drawdown and salt water
    intrusions."
    NORTH CAROLINA
    Department of Natural Resources
    and Community Development
    P.O. Box 27687
    Raleigh. NC 27511	
    The Division of Environmental Management, Ground Water Section, is
    responsible for regulating heat pumps. Legislation had been passed requiring
    "prior permission." Although 100 installations were estimated to be return-
    ing water to the aquifer and 500 discharging onto the surface, no problems
    had yet been noted.
    NORTH DAKOTA
    State Department of Health*
    Missouri Office Building
    1200 Missouri Avenue
    Bismark. ND 58505	
    As of August 1981, 30 ground-water source heat pumps were in operation,
    all of which returned water to the aquifer. One installation discharged
    water onto the surface. Although no problems associated with heat pumps had
    been noted, the State Department of Health was in the process of evaluating
    this possibility. This department requires information for single-family
    units under existing water well standards and that wells be built in confor-
    mance with state water-well regulations. Additional regulations were being
    developed.
    20
    [3-235]
    

    -------
    OHIO
    Ohio Environmental Protection Agency*
    361 E. Broad Street
    P.O. Rox 1049
    Columbus. OH 43216	
    The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency will probably regulate return
    wells, but had not yet inventoried the installations. Ohio's proposed policy
    on the use of return wells is in Appendix C. Reported problems were
    inadequate supply well yield in some areas, inadequate capacity of return
    wells used by more than one or two homes, and clogging of return wells.
    Department of Natural Resources
    Division of Water
    Fountain Square
    Columbus, OH 43224
    This department has issued a brochure on the utilization of ground water
    for heating and cooling that is available upon request.
    OKLAHOMA
    Water Resources Board*
    P.O. Box 53585
    Oklahoma City, OK 73152
    Regulations were in use. The Water Resources Board, as of September
    1981, required a permit for the "initial well to take ground water," regard-
    less of use.
    Oklahoma State Department of Health*
    Environmental Health Service
    P.O. Box 53551
    Oklahoma City, OK 73152	
    The State Department of Health, as of September 1981. required only
    notification of the installation of injection wells; it will eventually
    require permits under the UIC program to prevent contamination of potable
    water supplies.
    21
    

    -------
    Some heat pump installations had resulted in cross connnections between
    potable water and water of questionable quality, thus creating a potential
    health hazard. This agency reported some problems with injection wells that
    were not recharging the water into the formation, but instead were flooding
    the area.
    OREGON
    Water Resources Department
    555 13th Street
    Salem, OR 97310	
    No laws, regulations, or guidelines relating specifically to heat pumps
    had been developed. Legislation was passed in 1979, but funding limitations
    prevented implementation (Appendix C). This legislation was pertinent to
    geothermal resources and required considerable hydrogeologic data. The
    number of heat pump installations was unknown, but one problem was reported:
    A parking lot flooded due to the faulty construction of a return well.
    PENNSYLVANIA
    Commonwealth of Pennsylvania*
    Department of Environmental Resources
    P.O. Box 2063
    Hamsburg. PA 17120	
    The Department of Environmental Resources will be responsible for the
    ground-water quality protection aspects of heat pump systems (Appendix B).
    About 538 heat pump installations were in use. Reportedly, most residential
    systems used injection wells. The only likely problems were scaling and
    clogging, especially in areas which used ground water high in calcium, iron,
    and magnesium.
    22
    [3-23ffI
    

    -------
    This department's report, "Ground-Water Heat Pumps in Pennsylvania,"
    presents an excellent summary of the utilization of heat pumps (Appendix C).
    The sections on economics, regulating concerns, and conclusions are recom-
    mended reading for officials of other states and persons concerned with heat
    pumps.
    SOUTH CAROLINA
    Department of Health & Environmental Control*
    2600 Bull Street
    Columbia. SC 29201	
    It was estimated that about 500 water-source heat pumps are installed
    per year. Most of the systems (95%) used ground water. Details on problems
    were not yet available.
    SOUTH DAKOTA
    Dpp^rtment of Water and Natural
    Resources
    Joe Foss Building
    Pierre. SD 57501	
    No problems were reported since ground-water source heat pumps had not
    "caught on" in South Dakota. This state was still assessing the need for
    and the extent and type of regulatory controls.
    South Dakota Geological Survey
    Science Center. University
    Vermilion, SD 57065	
    No research had been done in South Dakota, but some efforts were made to
    study the geothermal potential in western South Dakota where water tempera-
    tures exceed 100°C. Several institutions, including a school in Chamberlain
    and a hospital in Pierre, had large geothermal projects. Details on these
    installations were not yet available.
    23
    [3-239}
    

    -------
    TENNESSEE
    Department of Public Health"
    Cordell Hull Building
    Nashville. TN 37219	
    The Department of Public Health is responsible for waste water dis-
    charge. Although no exact count was available, it was estimated that 300 new
    heat pump wells are drilled each year; most reportedly discharged onto the
    surface.
    The Tennessee Valley Authority has a program providing assistance to
    persons wanting to install ground-water heat pumps. However, few loans had
    been made because of the agency's stringent regulations regarding ground-
    water supply and water quality.
    Department of Conservation*
    Division of Water Resources
    4721 Trousrialo Drive
    Nashville. TN 37219	
    The Department of Conservation is responsible for registering water
    wells that yield 50,000 gallons or more per day and for licensing contractors
    and pump installers. The agency stated that there is a need for a comprehen-
    sive regulatory program, but at that time had insufficient information to
    design such a program. However, this agency will endeavor to monitor the
    situation through the state's requirement that licensed drillers must report
    the drilling of water wells.
    TEXAS
    Department of Water Resources
    1700 N. Congress Avenue
    P.O. Box 13087
    Austin, TX 78711	
    The letter from the Department of Water Resources outlines the use of
    heat pumps in Texas (Appendix 8). The department reported that "those
    24
    

    -------
    systems which have been locate! and analyzed do not pose any threat to the
    environment, nor have any complaints or problems been reported."
    UTAH
    Utah Water Research Laboratory
    Extension Service
    Utah State University
    Logan. UT 84322	
    A well permit is required for a ground-water heat pump system. To
    acquire the permit (water right), the homeowner must file an application with
    the Utah Division of Water Rights and receive approval of the application.
    Utah State University had done 
    -------
    Four installations discharged water to the surface and two had a closed-
    loop system.
    VIKGINK
    State Water Control Board*
    P.O. Box 11143
    Richmond. VA 2-1201	
    This agency had assumed responsibility for preparing statewide regula-
    tions for heat pumps. No information on the utilization of heat pumps was
    available.
    Hampton Roads Water Quality Agency
    1436 Air Rail Avenue
    Virginia Beach, VA 23455	
    The Hampton Roads Water Quality Agency originally intended to complete a
    task entitled "Criteria Development for Ground Water-Air Heat Pumps," but had
    modified its plans when the responsibility of preparing regulations was
    assigned to the State Water Control Board (Appendix B).
    WASHINGTON
    Department of Ecology*
    Mail Stop PV-ll
    Olvmpia. WA 98504
    The Department of Ecology reported that 47 installations returned water
    to the aquifer and 31 discharged water onto the surface. The only problems,
    which were unverified, were associated with injection wells. This depart-
    ment's letter of August 7, 1981, explains in detail the topics of concern and
    emphasizes a relevant thought: "Both the product suppliers and the well
    drillers conclude that one does not know the heating/refrigeration business
    nor does the other know the well drilling business. Further, they have not
    2fi
    [3-2421
    

    -------
    gotten together to discuss the topic" (Appendix B). The standard operating
    procedure for water-source heat pumps is given in Appendix C.
    Washington State Energy Office
    400 E. Union Street
    Olympia. WA 98504		
    The State Energy Office reported 5 installations that discharged onto
    the subsurface, 175 to the surface, *nd 1 large district heating system that
    used public supply water and injected into the subsurface.
    This agency published the proceedings of a symposium held on September
    24, 1980. [t ;s entitled Geothermal Symposium--Low Temperature Utilization
    Heat Pump Applications. District Heating. Because of the size of the
    document, it was not possible to include it in this report.
    WEST VIRGINIA
    Department of Natural Resources*
    Division of Water Resources
    Ground Water/Hazardous Waste Branch
    1201 Greenbriar Road
    Charleston. WV 2S311	
    There were no known water-source heat pumps in West Virginia. The
    Department of Natural Resources was developing regulations and assessing
    methodology necessary for obtaining state primacy delegation for the UIC
    program.
    WISCONSIN
    Department of Natural Resources*
    P.O. Box 7921
    Madison, WI	
    The Department of Natural Resources has the responsibility of approving
    ground-water heat pump supply wells. According to this department's reply,
    return wells were generally prohibited. The following is an extract from
    legislation passed in 1981 by the Wisconsin legislature:
    •27
    [3-243]
    

    -------
    (4) Ground water heat pump project, (a) Approval. Until July 1,
    1984, the Department of Natural Resources may approve the
    installation and operation of not more than 60 ground-water heat
    pump systems which inject circulated water into the ground water
    of the State notwithstanding the requirements of sections 1.11
    and 144.025 and chapters 147 and 162 of the statutes if:
    1.	The ground water heat pump system has an alternative means of
    disposing of the circulated water.
    2.	The ground water heat pump system serves a building not larger
    than 30,000 cubic feet, and
    3.	No more than .1 ground water heat pump systems are approved in
    any county.
    4.	Any injection well used to inject circulated water into the
    ground water of the State is constructed by a well driller
    registered under chapter 162 of the statutes.
    (b)	Monitoring. The Department of Natural Resources shall monitor
    ground water heat pumps approved under this project. The
    Department may rescind its approval of the operation of a ground
    water heat pump system if it determines that the injection of
    circulated water into the ground water is harmful to the waters of
    the State. If approval is rescinded, the ground water heat pump
    system may not inject circulated water into the ground water of the
    State.
    (c)	Design: implementation; exemption from rule-making require-
    ments. The Department of Natural Resources, with the cooperation
    of the Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey and the
    Department of Administration, shall design and implement this
    project. Notwithstanding the requirements of chapter 227 of the
    statutes, the Department of Natural Resources is not required to
    promulgate rules to design, implement, administer or enforce this
    project.
    (d)	Study; reports. The Department of Natural Resources shall
    conduct a study to assess the environmental impact of the
    utilization of groundwater heat pump systems. The Department of
    Natural Resources shall report its interim findings to the
    legislature on or before July 1. 1932, and July 1, 1983, and shall
    file its final report and recommendations on or before July 1,
    1984.
    Geological and Natural History Survey
    University of Wisconsin - Extension
    1815 University Avenue
    Madison, WI 53706
    This state agency reported 130 installations using ground water that
    discharged onto the surface; in addition, 45 installations returned the water
    to the subsurface by seepage.
    23
    [3-244]
    

    -------
    WYOMING
    State Engineer's Office*
    Barrett Ruilding
    Cheyenne. WY 82002	
    All water use in Wyoming is controlled by the State Engineer's Office.
    Any individual wishing to utilize a heat pump must go through the state's
    ground-water appropriation permitting procedures. Contamination problems by
    injection or return wells would be a concern of the Department of
    Environmental Quality.
    Wyoming Geothermal Assessment Group
    Department of Geology
    University of Wyoming
    Laramie, WY 32071	 	
    At the time of the survey, heat pumps were basically new in Wyoming.
    Heat pump use was reported to be so slight that any potential problems either
    had not occurred or had not been publicized.
    Department of Environmental Quality
    Water Quality Division
    Equality State Bank Building
    Cheyenne. WY 82002	
    The Department of Environmental Quality does not regulate or administer
    the use of heat pumps, but does regulate the disposal of geothermal fluid.
    SUMMARY OF NATIONWIDE FINDINGS
    At the time this survey was conducted in the fall of 1981, it was
    impossible to accurately inventory water-source heat pump systems nation-
    wide or to assess problems associated with their use and the need for their
    regulation. States reporting few or no installations may have been
    presenting the true situation, or their answers may have reflected the fact
    that most states did not require registration of or permits for all or part
    29
    [3-245}
    

    -------
    of these systems; therefore, these states may have had no means of obtain-
    ing an accurate count. Similarly, some state agencies may have been unaware
    of problems with heat pumps because there was no specific agency to which
    such matters were routinely reported or because the installations had not
    been in use long enough to develop problems. Therefore, the following
    summary of nationwide findings is probably an underestimation of the true
    utilization of water-source heat pumps in the nation and the problems
    associated with their use.
    Whenever several agencies within a state reported different numbers, the
    largest numbers were used. States were grouped according to the number of
    systems reported: unknown, less than 100, 100 to 999, or 1000 or more
    systems. The information was further subdivided according to source of water
    supply, method of disposal, reported problems associated with these alterna-
    tives, and regulation of their use.
    INVENTORY
    Seven states did not reply to the letter and questionnaire: Alabama,
    Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Nebraska, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island.
    (Alaska and Hawaii were not contacted.)
    Of the 41 states responding, 35 reported that water-source heat pumps
    were utilized in their states, S were unsure (Maryland, Mississippi, Nevada,
    Virginia, and West Virginia), and 1 reported none (Maine).
    Of the 35 states reporting some utilization of water-source heat pumps,
    16 reported less than 100 installations (Arizona, California, Colorado,
    Connecticut, Delaware, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Massachusetts, Montana, New
    Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota, Utah, Vermont, and Wvommg); 6 reported
    between 100 to 999 (Indiana, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, North Carolina,
    Washington, and Wisconsin): 1 reported more than 1000 (Florida): the
    remaining 12 states reported that the numbers of installations was unknown.
    30
    [3-246]
    

    -------
    SOURCE OF WATER AND METHOD OF DISPOSAL
    Of the 35 states reporting some utilization of water-source heat pumps,
    8 made no attempt to break down the systems by water source and disposal
    method: Arizona, California. Oregon, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, New York, South
    Carolina, and South Dakota. Of the remaining 27 states, only 4 (Idaho,
    Louisiana, Montana, and Vermont) reported the use of public supply water as
    the source for systems, a source less frequently used than ground water. The
    exclusive use of ground water was reported by 23 states.
    Of the 27 states reporting the method of processing or storing spent
    water, only 6 reported the use of a closed system whereby the spent water was
    stored in or recycled from an underground well or tank (Idaho, Illinois,
    Iowa, Minnesota. Montana, and Vermont). However, in all six states these
    systems were less commonly used than those systems which returned the water
    to the surface or to an aquifer.
    Of these 27 states reporting on the method of processing or storing the
    spent water, 11 states reported return to the aquifer by injection well as
    being the most common method in use: Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware,
    Florida, Kansas, .Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota, Texas,
    and Utah. In a few cases, return to aquifer by leach field was mentioned.
    Ten states reported release to surface water as the most prevalent practice
    (Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana. Montana, North Carolina, Tennessee,
    Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin), and six reported that roughly equal
    numbers utilized surface disposal and return to aquifer.
    PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH WATER-SOURCE HEAT PUMPS SYSTEMS
    Of the 35 states reporting some utilization of water-source heat pumps,
    17 reported one or more instances of problems with the return or supply
    wells, and 18 reported no problems, but with the qualification that this
    natter had not been investigated, that it was too early to tell, or that this
    31
    [3-247]
    

    -------
    information was unknown. Florida, which reported the most water-source heat
    pumps (approximately 5000 of which return water to the aquifer and 2500 of
    which return water to the surface), had the most problems to report.
    Problems reported in connection with supply wells included inadequate
    spacing of wells; capacity of wells not sufficient to supply the system;
    deterioration of water quality in the supply aquifer due to saltwater
    intrusion; conflict with other water usage in areas of scarce ground water;
    and scaling, plugging, or sanding up of the supply well.
    Problems reported in connection with return wells include the following:
    1) plugging of the return well (very common) and the possibility of ground-
    water contamination if chemicals are used to solve this problem; 2) insuffi-
    cient capacity of the return well to serve the system; 3) thermal pollution
    of ground water when the supply and return wells are too closely situated in
    the same aquifer; 4) ground-water deterioration when supply well pumps water
    of quality that is inferior to that of the return well aquifer; 5) and the
    use of return wells for disposal of other waste water, including hazardous
    waste. This alternative is more costly than discharge to the surface.
    Although not specifically requested in the questionnaire, problems with
    other aspects of water-source heat pumps were mentioned or are known from
    Louisiana's study of these systems.
    Water sources from public supply: This alternative is generally
    cost-prohibitive unless a closed system is used to recycle water.
    Processed water released to surface: This water is lost from the
    aquifer and is thus a waste of a valuable natural resource which
    may be needed in the future for more important uses. This water
    may cause mosquito control problems, damage neighboring property,
    or cause thermal pollution of surface waters.
    Processed water recycled in an underground tank or sealed well:
    Initially, this is the most expensive system to construct, but may
    be at least equally cost-efficient in the long run; the most
    serious question that remains to be answered is whether these
    systems are thermally efficient after several years of operation.
    32
    [3-248]
    

    -------
    Installation of water-source heat pumps systems: Because water-
    source heat pumps are composed of pieces of existing technologies
    and are not new, unique entities, owners of these systems may not
    realize the most efficient systems for their money. Thus far there
    has been little communication between the water-well contractors
    who drill the wells and the heating/refrigeration people who
    install the heat exchangers.
    Regulatory fragmentation: The fragmentation mentioned above
    carries over into the regulation of such systems and complicates
    the enactment and enforcement of regulatory programs.
    REGULATION OF WATER-SOURCE HEAT PUMP SYSTEMS
    Water-source heat pump systems are being installed in increasing
    numbers, and it is likely that in states where these systems are major users
    of ground water some action will be necessary—if it has not already been
    taken—to minimize misuse of an important natural resource. In the question-
    naire, states were asked if they had or were developing guidelines, regula-
    tions, or legislation for water-source heat pump systems. This question
    revealed itself to be ambiguous because most states have some regulations and
    legislation that cover part of these systems, although they may not be
    specific to water-source heat pump systems. To further complicate the
    issue, different agencies usually regulate supply wells, surface discharge,
    and return wells. Although the information was not specifically requested,
    several states mentioned that they had acquired or were seeking regulatory
    authority over injection wells (Class V) under a UIC program and would be
    developing regulations for this aspect of water-source heat pumps if they
    were determined to be a potential source of ground-water contamination.
    The regulatory agency and the aspect of the system registered,
    permitted, regulated, or prohibited are mentioned in the section "Summary of
    Replies." The 13 states that mentioned having or developing guidelines,
    regulations, or legislation specific to water-source heat pump systems were
    Connecticut. Delaware, Missouri. Michigan. Minnesota. Massachusetts, Ohio,
    33
    [3-249]
    

    -------
    Oregon, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, North Dakota, Washington, and
    Wisconsin.. Part of Wisconsin's legislation is excerpted in the section
    "Summary of Replies," and relevant documents from Connecticut, Michigan,
    Minnesota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvani/i, and Washington are given in
    Appendix C.
    34
    [3-250]
    

    -------
    SECTION 3.2.7
    TITLE OF STODY:
    (OR SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    AUTHOR:
    (or INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION:
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES:
    Understanding Heat Pumps, Ground
    Water, and Wells - Questions and
    Answers for the Responsible
    Consumer
    National Water Well Association
    1983
    Not applicable
    Not applicable
    This is a consumer-oriented
    document designed to inform
    persons about heat pump systems.
    Information is presented in a
    question and answer format. The
    report provides a table
    summarizing groundwater heat pump
    use and effluent disposal
    regulations by state.
    [3-251]
    

    -------
    Supply Air
    Heat Exchanger
    Refrigerant Air
    Air Handler Z
    K tic Hot Water
    achanger
    Water/Refrigerant
    Heat SechangaKa
    MM
    

    -------
    Prepared by the
    National Water Well Association
    in cooperation with the
    ground water heat pump industry.
    Kevin B. McCray, Editor
    i
    [3-253-]
    

    -------
    Copyright © 1983
    National Water Well Association
    500 W Wilson Bndge Road
    Worthington, Ohio 43085
    ii
    [3-254}
    

    -------
    QUESTIONS
    What is a heat pump'5 . 	 		1
    How does a water to-air heat pump operate' ......	I
    Why use ground water' ..... ....	2
    What is ground water71 What are the advantages of ground water'5 		2
    How is ground water obtained' 	 . . . 		3
    Is there enough ground water available1	4
    What is the temperature of the available ground water^ .. 		4
    How much ground water does a ground water heat pump require3 . 		6
    How much additional water do I need for domestic use?		7
    What about water pumps and piping systems? ... .... .... .. ..	8
    How can I leam if my well will supply enough water5 		...	.9
    Must the water be treated or softened before it passes through the ground water heat pump3 		9
    What do I do with the water after it has been used by the heat pump'	 		10
    Won't I be in danger of depleting my property s ground water supply, not to mention my neighbor s,
    if 1 have a ground water heat pump installed' . .	.	...	.13
    How efficient are ground water heat pumps'5 How do they compare to the performance of other heating methods5 .	14
    How reliable are ground water heat pumps5 . 		15
    If ground water heat pumps are so temfic. why didn't people use them long ago"3 		17
    Then why am I just learning about ground water heat pumps5 		17
    1 have a 20-year-old house. Can a ground water heat pump be retrofittecP .... ... ....	17
    Can the ground water heat pump be used for other than household heating5 ...	.. 	19
    Is ground water heat pump conditioned air adequate for the coldest winters and hottest summers' 		19
    What happens on a 0 F day when my heat pump or well pump fails5 .	19
    Will vanation of the water table affect the performance of my ground water heat pump' .	19
    What about humidity in my house during the winter and dehumidification in the summer5 .	20
    What if there s a refngerant leak5 Won t it be harmful to my family or our pets and couldn t it contaminate my
    ground water supply5	.....	20
    How much money can I save using a ground water heat pump5	.	20
    How does my unit's COP affect my payback penod5 	24
    How will having a ground water heat pump affect the value of my property, or my ability to sell it? 	25
    Couldn 11 use the ground water heal pump to produce hot water for bathing and cooking' 	 25
    What if I can t use a well' 	 	27
    What about solar eneigy and ground water heat pumps'	.	.		27
    What laws and regulations should I be aware of when considenng the use of a ground water heat pump' . ... 27
    What about energy tax credits that I might receive if 1 install a ground water heat pump' ...	32
    I have an air to-air unit installed in my home now Can I convert it to a water to-air unit'	.	32
    My heating, air-conditioning contractor says that he doesn't want anything to do with ground water heat pumps5	. 32
    ill
    [3-255]
    

    -------
    Why aren't the major heating and air-condiboning equipment manufacuturers promoting the widespread use of
    ground water heat pumps'3	 		33
    I live in the city Can I use a ground water heat pump3		33
    How should a ground water heat pump be selected^ 	 		33
    When should I decide against a ground water heat pump3	34
    Who makes ground water heat pumps3 	 ...	34
    What should I look for in selecting a manufacturer3 	 		.34
    What's the future market of the ground water heat pump3	 	34
    Why is the National Water Well Association so activelv promoting the use of a heating and cooling system3	35
    How can I get more information on ground water heat pumps for my specific applications3 		35
    IV
    [3-25SF
    

    -------
    INTRODUCTION
    Nearly half of the energy used in the residential and
    commercial sectors in the United States goes for space
    heating This represents onesixth of the total U S energy
    use and one-fourth of the total oil and natural gas
    consumption
    Costs of heating and cooling homes continue to nse and
    manv projections indicate that these costs will continue to
    nse for >ears to come Consumers therefore, are
    reconsidenng alternatives that they may have rejected in
    cheaper energy times
    Today, many consumers are in an excellent position to
    realize energy savings through the use of ground water heat
    pump systems, especially in areas that have adequate
    supplies of underground water available through the use of
    wells Ground water heat pumps have been found to be
    particularly efficient in areas that have an extreme vanation in
    outdoor air temperatures—the areas that use the most
    energy for space conditioning
    Since ground water heat pump systems are still relatively
    new in the minds of many consumers, these same
    consumers are unfamiliar with the many types of systems
    and their relative advantages and disadvantages
    Consumers, through no fault of their own. typically know
    little about
    •	State regulations
    •	Life cycle cost effectiveness
    •	Ground water
    •	Reputable water well contractors
    •	Reputable heanng/air-conditioning contractors.
    This publication was prepared to
    •	Help consumers select the most economical and
    environmentally safe system
    •	Help consumers understand the feasibility of using
    these systems to meet their heaong and air-conditioning
    needs
    •	Help increase awareness of ground water resources
    •	Address potential problems of system design and
    operation, such as scaling, corrosion, pipe clogging
    •	Assist consumers, construction companies, water well
    contractors, pump installers and heanng/air
    -------
    WHAT IS A HEAT POMP?
    Essentially, a heat pump is a device that
    moves heat from a relatively cool area to
    another, wanner area. A refrigerator is a type
    of heat pump.
    In its cooling mode a heat pump works
    like an ordinary air conditioner, extracting heat from inside a
    building and pumping it outdoors. But unlike an air
    conditioner, the heat pump can be reversed. During cold
    weather, a heat pump can absorb heat from outdoors or
    ground water and transfer it to the inside air.
    Most of the heat pumps installed today are reversible,
    meaning they can provide cooling as well as heating. This is
    made possible by using a device called a refrigerant
    reversing valve, which permits the flow of refrigerant to be
    reversed. Some units may also be equipped to provide hot
    water heat as an alternative to hot air. These units are
    equipped with a small heat exchanger between the
    refrigerant reversing valve and the compressor, which
    provides hot water for domestic needs.
    HOW DOES A WATER-TO-AJR
    HEAT POMP OPERATE?
    The operation of a water-to-air. or ground water
    heat pump simply involves taking thermal
    energy (heat) from ground water and
    transferring it into the space being
    conditioned during the winter months.
    Summer cooling is provided when the system puts excess
    heat from the structure back into the ground water. This is
    possible because the temperature of ground water remains
    fairiy constant throughout the year—never freezing in winter
    or wanning in summer.
    The heating cycle begins when the ground water is piped
    through tubes to a heat exchanger. Surrounding these tubes
    is a container filled with a liquid refrigerant (Freon*).* The
    Freon'®, absorbing heat from the ground water, forms a cool
    gas (10 to 30 F cooler than the ground water). The gas is
    then directed to a compressor, which compresses this gas
    to a hot denser gas (an average of 180 F and 245 pounds
    per square inch pressure for most models). The hot gas
    then flows to another heat exchanger, where the heat from
    the Freon-* gas is released to air and moved throughout the
    house. After this release of heat the Freond condenses to a FIGURE 1. Cooling mode
    liquid and flows through an expansion device which reduces
    the pressure and consequently lowers the temperature
    again. Finally, the refrigerant reenters the first heat
    exchanger and the cycle is repeated.
    For home cooling, the above process is reversed. The
    compressor sends the hot, dense gas directly to the water.
    The refrigerant is cooled by this process. The now liquid
    Freon-* enters an expansion device, which further lowers its
    temperature and pressure. The cool liquid refrigerant flows
    to the second heat exchanger, where it absorbs heat from
    the air in the house. In exchange, cooler air is released and
    moved through the house. The warmed refrigerant returns
    to the compressor to repeat the cycle.
    •Freon * is a registered trade name of the E.I. Dupont De Nemours Co.
    Although other fluids (ammonia, nitrogen) can be used. Freon ' is the
    most common.
    COOUMG MODE
    1
    [3-258]
    

    -------
    Harwii*
    HEATING MODE
    FIGURE 2. Heating mode
    WHY USE GROUND WATER?
    Ground water is attractive as a potential low
    temperature energy source in applications
    such as residential and commercial space
    conditioning. By using a heat pump, ground
    water can serve as a heat source (for heating)
    and a heat sink (for cooling).
    The temperature of the ground water is nearly the same
    year-round, regardless of the temperature extremes on the
    surface. Thus, it is warmer than the outside air in winter and
    cooler in summer. Since heat pump capacity and efficiency
    vary significantly with the heat source/sink temperature (or
    temperature difference between the source/sink and
    conditioned space), a ground water heat pump system
    offers considerable advantages over the more widely used
    air-to-air heat pump. Water will hold five times more heat than
    an equal weight of air and its heat content does not vary with
    its temperature. Air yields very little heat at temperatures
    below 25 F and will accept very little heat in the cooling
    cycle at temperatures above 85 F.
    FIGURE 3. How water occurs in the rocks
    WHAT ARE THE
    ADVANTAGES OF GROUND
    WATER?
    Ground water has often been preferred over
    surface water for development in homes or
    industry. Its many advantages indude: low
    development and treatment costs; relatively
    constant yield and supply; constant chemical
    quality; sediment-free nature: constant temperature; no
    evaporation losses; and minimal area requirements for
    development Many of these advantages, especially ground
    water's constant temperature, are directly applicable in
    considering the use of ground water as a heat source.
    The demand for ground water development will increase
    as our population, industry and per capita needs for water
    increase. Ground water is often preferred by industry for
    WHAT IS GROUND WATER?
    Ground water is the water which fills pores and
    cracks in underground rocks and soil. Like
    petroleum, uranium or cobalt ground water
    has economic value. But unlike other
    economic resources and minerals, ground
    water is part of the endless hydrologic cycle. Over 93
    percent of the water supply in the United States lies
    underground, yet most of our current water supply comes
    from surface sources such as lakes, rivers and streams.
    Ground water is replenished by nature depending on the
    local climate and geology and is vanable in both amount
    and quality. When rain falls, the plants and soils take up
    water. Some of the excess water runs off to streams, and
    some percolates down into the pores and cracks of the
    subsurface rocks. Ground water does not flow in veins,
    domes or underground rivers or lakes. A water well that
    extends into the saturated zone will fill with water to the level
    of the water table—the top of the zone in which all of the
    openings of the rocks are filled with water.
    ZONE OF AERATXDNjpjSXr
    ZONE OF SATURATION
    GROUNDWATER .
    LAND SURFACE
    SURFACE WATER
    	(not ground water) surround
    contacts on rock particle
    	Approximate	—
    level of the water table
    GRAVEL
    All openings below water
    table full of water—ground water
    CREVICED ROCK
    2
    [3-2591
    

    -------
    cooling and processing because of its constant cool
    temperatures, low cost and sediment-free nature. Small and
    mid-sized communities may prefer ground water for their
    requirements due to its low development expansion and
    treatment costs.
    HOW IS GROUND WATER
    OBTAINED?
    A modem water well is not what most of us
    think of when wells are mentioned—a
    wooden bucket cranked up from a dark hole
    in the ground, or the old-fashioned pitcher
    pump that can still be found in some rural
    areas.
    The modem water well is either drilled with a cable tool
    percussion rig, a rotary rig or a jetting rig. A complete,
    modem well system includes casing, pump and pressure
    tank. In some cases, filtration or chemical treatment is
    required where the mineral content of the ground water is
    unacceptable. In considering the well construction cost, you
    should know that the actual drilling is typically the cheapest
    part of the well.
    A well should be located on the highest ground
    practicable. It should certainly be on ground higher than
    nearby sources of pollution. The well casing should
    terminate above ground and the ground surface at the wefl
    site should be built-up when necessary so that surface water
    will drain away from the well in all directions. A well should
    be located so that it will be accessible for pump repair,
    cleaning, treatment testing and inspection. The top of the
    well should not be within a basement nor under a building
    with no basement When adjacent to a building, the well
    should be at least 2 feet outside any projection, such as
    overhanging eaves.
    The design and construction of a well should be adapted
    to the geologic and the ground water conditions existing at
    the site of the well.
    In selecting the type of well to be constructed, these
    objectives should be attained: 1) the well should be
    adequate in diameter and depth to obtain the water available
    from the water bearing formation in which the well is
    completed, 2) the well should be designed to leave no
    unsealed opening around the well which could conduct
    surface water, contaminated ground water or undesirable
    ground water vertically to the intake portion of the well, and
    4) the materials that are to be a part of the permanent well
    should be durable. Your water well contractor can refer to
    well logs, records of other wells in the area, to tell him what
    he might expect to encounter in constructing your well. At
    the completion of your well he should provide you with your
    own well log. which should tell you. among other things,
    data on unsuccessful drilling, the well's actual location, its
    diameter, assembled order of each size and length of casing
    and liners, complete description of well screen, grouting
    depths, water levels, pumping test data and a geologic
    record of formations penetrated. The record should also
    FIGURE 4. Typical cross section of underground strata.
    showing various types of well construction. Note
    that drilled well penetrating into rock formation
    does not require casing below bottom level of
    sand-and-gravel formation
    include results of mineral analysis and bacteriological tests
    taken immediately after well disinfection.
    A casing lines the well shaft supporting the walls of the
    well and serving to keep out possible surface contaminants.
    The well pump is the heart of the system, moving water up
    from the aquifer to the faucet Two main types of domestic
    electrically powered pumps are now being sold:
    submersibles and jets Reciprocating pumps are also
    available, but are considered obsolete except for special
    applications. The submersible pump is placed inside the well
    and attached to the discharge pipe. A jet pump is generally
    used for shallow weil applications. Usually the pump itself is
    not submersed in the well, but rather it is located in a clean,
    dry location where it won't be subjected to freezing air
    temperatures. Your drilling contractor or pump installer will
    be able to recommend the pump that best meets your
    needs. Submersible pumps are generally preferred for deep
    weil applications due to their greater efficiency.
    The pressure tank receives water the pump has moved.
    As water is pumped into the pressure tank the air at the top
    of the tank is compressed. When you turn the faucet on. the
    compressed air expands, forcing water out of the tank and
    into your pipes. Whenever the pressure drops below a set
    pressure, more water is pumped into the tank. A good
    pressure tank cuts pumping costs and promotes longer
    pump life. For ground water heat pumps, the more storage
    capacity, the longer the heat pump will run during its cycle,
    resulting in a more efficient operation.
    [3-26X
    

    -------
    IS THERE, ENOUGH GROUND
    WATEFLAVAJLABLE?
    Al 976 study done by the National Water Well
    Association concluded that over 85 percent
    of the continental United States had sufficient
    shallow ground water resources to use the
    ground water heat pump for residential
    heating and cooling.
    While ground water receives a continuous supply of
    geothermal energy from the earth's interior, it is also a
    natural solar storage facility. Heat energy from the sun is
    absorbed by surface water which moves through the earth's
    % \ \ \ '. \ \ \ ^ 13
    \w\\\\nn\n>^\nv
    \ \ \ \ Ruddle** cfa* \ \ v
    \\ •
    orcement gc out Bw
    
    
    Sd*t6:-x-
    %
    \
    25"
    
    RGURE 5. When the borehole is drilled oversize (as in
    rotary drilling), the empty space between casing
    and borehole must be sealed with a cement or
    clay grout Otherwise, polluted surface or ground
    water may enter the water supply
    crust to the water table. This energy is stored in shallow
    ground water aquifers—bodies of rocks that contain usable
    water supplies.
    WHAT IS THE TEMPERATURE
    OF THE AVAILABLE GROUND
    WATER?
    The temperature range of shallow ground
    water in the U.S. ranges from 44 F in the
    north-central areas to approximately 80 F in
    Florida and southern Texas. In North
    America, ground water heat pumps can
    operate efficiently at ground water temperatures as low as
    39 F, with equipment currently being constructed. Higher
    temperature ground water will, of course, put less demand
    on the system and make it more efficient
    In the extreme South, where the cooling cycle
    predominates, ground water temperatures average about
    72 F. It leaves the ground water heat pump at about 85 F.
    Ground water heat pumps have been used for many years in
    Florida.
    In the North, where the heating cycle is crucial, ground
    water temperatures average about 52 F. There is less
    flexibility available in severe northern climates for lowering
    the ground water temperature before freezing occurs. Some
    heat pump units are designed to operate with a very small
    temperature drop in the water to avoid freezing damage with
    supply water as cool as 39 F.
    There is a potential risk of changing the ambient
    temperature of the aquifer where recharge or aquifer volume
    is limited. A ground water heat pump usually raises the
    temperature of the water by no more than 10 F. This water
    is therefore usually returned to the original aquifer with no
    change in water quality and only a modest temperature
    difference.
    In the fall of 1979, the Research Facility of the National
    Water Well Association was awarded a grant from the U.S.
    Environmental Protection Agency to ascertain the
    environmental impact of residential ground water heat pump
    systems. The most significant objective of this project was
    the determination of the thermal impact on various types of
    aquifers if water that has passed through a heat pump is
    returned underground.
    The project used a computer model to determine any
    thermal impact that might be expected as a result of the
    return of heat pump discharge water into the water supply
    aquifer. To limit a nearty infinite number of combinations of
    variables, the aquifer characteristics, well design and well
    spacing were kept constant for the nine evaluated test cities.
    To verify the reliability of the computer simulations, the
    data were compared with a carefully monitored field
    installation located near Columbus. Ohio.
    Houston, Texas, the southern most location, has the
    largest air-conditioning requirement and the smallest heating
    requirement of the test cities.
    4
    [3-251]
    

    -------
    37
    NORTH DAKOfA
    \ AbHirHGTUf*
    Montana
    \\lpr
    ^IIWESOrA
    -< xjrrl [JAIMJI \
    usc.lt«n^
    \vyoau"»
    ^iTir
    *+BKV>K.A
    ¦*K\ ADA
    i|A~-A
    11
    ^IRGir^A
    KANSAS
    
    KfMUCK
    '•MSSCORI
    N VCRUI.HA
    rF^I-^bth
    UrORrUA
    b L-wou^r ^ 67
    OKLAHOAAA
    TEXAS
    ARIZONA
    NEW ME.XJCO
    ALABAH-1 GEORGIA
    ^fcSISSI
    LO(JISIAisa
    FLORIDA \ 77
    FIGURE 6 Average temperature of shallow ground water F (Popular Science)
    The results found that a thermal front arrives at the
    production well 100 feet from the return well before the end
    of the third year, but it is not until the seventh year that the
    temperature at the production well has increased a full one
    degree Fahrenheit At the end of the air-conditioning season,
    after 20 years of operation, the temperature at the return well
    is 833 F and at the production weil it is 68.6 F The initial
    water temperature was 66 F Although the thermal front has
    migrated as far as 200 feet from the return well, the
    maximum extent of a one degree temperature change is
    125 feet
    Concord. Mew Hampshire, the most northern location,
    has the largest heating requirement and a very small air-
    conditioning requirement Of the nine locations studied, the
    greatest amount of heat would be removed from the model
    aquifer at Concord.
    The thermal front amves at the supply well before the
    end of the third year of operation However, the temperature
    at the return well never changes by as much as one degree
    Fahrenheit during the 30 years of simulated operation The
    original ground water temperature was 47 F At the end of
    the heating season, after 20 years of operation, the
    temperature at the return well is 43 2 F and at the supply
    well it is 46 5 F A change of one degree Fahrenheit never
    extends beyond 60 feet from the supply well.
    The system in Columbus, Ohio, establishes equilibnum
    after five years of operation and remains constant for the
    remainder of the 20-year simulation A small cold front
    develops around the return well in the heating season and it
    is replaced by a small warm front that develops dunng the
    air-conditioning season No permanent net aquifer
    temperature change of any significance occurs
    Based on the simulations, measurable changes in
    aquifer temperatures can be expected to occur if ground
    water used by a heat pump is returned underground.
    However, the changes appear to be quite small and
    migration of the thermal front Is somewhat limited. The
    temperature changes that do occur appear to have minimal
    effect on the water chemistry of most aquifer systems and
    there are no other environmental effects readily apparent
    It should be recognized that vaiying factors related to
    aquifer charactenstics could have a significant impact on the
    results obtained For example, if the thickness of the aquifer
    is 50 feet, one-half the thickness used in the simulation, the
    thermal front will expand at twice the rate descnbed above
    No set rule of thumb can be established for well spacing or
    maximum density of heat pump use Each location must be
    examined on the basis of its own charactenstics. according
    to the NWWA report.
    5
    [3-232
    

    -------
    A senous problem could develop in extremely hot or
    cold environments where increased ground water withdrawal
    may be required to meet heat exchange demands. In areas
    with moderate climates, the threat of thermal pollution is
    nearly eliminated by the balancing of recharged warmer
    water in the summer with cooler water in the winter. In areas
    like the Gulf Coast region where air conditioning is required
    nearly three-fourths of the year, a definite possibility exists for
    an increase in aquifer temperature, especially in areas where
    the aquifer being recharged has low permeability.
    HOW MUCH WATER DOES A
    GROUND WATER HEAT
    PUMP REQUIRE?
    In order for a ground water heat pump to operate at its
    specified heating and cooling capacity and efficiency,
    the proper ground water flow rate through the water to-
    refngerant heat exchanger must be maintained. The
    ground water aquifer, well and pumping system must
    be able to supply the required flow rate
    The water flow requirement of a ground water heat
    pump is dependent on its sizing (which vanes over a wide
    range for individual home applications), its design, water flow
    per Btu/hour of heating (which vanes over a wide range for
    different manufacturers) and the temperature of available
    ground water (which vanes from 44 F in the north central
    states to 80 F in the extreme southern states) The
    requirements of heat pumps sized to provide 50.000 Btu/hr
    space heating output (typical sizing for an average modem
    home) can range from 5 to 15 gpm (7200 to 21,600
    gallons per day), depending on the design of the specific
    equipment Such heat pumps can require even higher water
    flows dunng the summer if equipped with ground water heat
    exchangers for space cooling, and an additional water flow
    of 1 to 3 gpm (1.440 to 4320 gallons per day) can be
    required if a separate ground water heat pump is used for
    water heating in the home. The required water flows for heat
    pumps are therefore much larger than 300 to 400 gallons
    per day required for domestic water supply systems.
    The consumption of ground water heat pumps
    supplying 75.20 and 15 million Btu/year of space heating,
    hot water heating and space cooling, respectively, can range
    from 500.000 to 2.000.000 gallons per year, depending on
    the charactenstics of the specific equipment and installation.
    Brevard County. Honda, has more than 16.000 ground
    water heat pump units in place, capable of pumping a
    combined total of 180 million gallons of water daily—three
    times more than the city of Orlando s total daily water use
    Volusia County, Flonda. has 1346 ground water heat pump
    systems, with a 6 16 million gallons per day capacity
    The water flow requirement per ton vanes with the water
    temperature and the manufacturer's choice of design As a
    very general rule of thumb, a minimum flow of about 25 to
    3 gpm for every 12.000 Btu per hour (ton) of heating and
    cooling will be needed. One manufacturer says that if the
    ground water temperature is 55 F. the company s 3-ton
    (36.000 Btu) unit has a flow rate of 23 to 3 gpm/ton If the
    temperature is 50 F the required flow rate for this
    equipment is 5 gpm Forty-five degree water must flow at the
    rate of 10 gpm If the home relies on ground water for other
    domestic needs as well the system should be designed to
    handle peak water consumption
    Water use restnctions are more stnngent in western
    states. These states adhere to the prior appropriation system
    of water law When disputes over water use arise, pnonty is
    given to parties having senior u.ater rights Manv western
    states have also specified preferred uses that are given
    pnonty over other senior water rights. Eastern states
    generally follow npanan water law which specifies that the
    water flowing on or under one s land may be used as long
    as it is put to reasonable use Generally, a npanan landowner
    is not subject to quantity limitations
    Thus, ground water heat pump users are more likely to
    be subject to water quantity limitations in the western states
    However, these limitations may only apply to commercial
    applications since domestic use of ground water heat
    pumps may be considered a preferred use. exempt from
    most water use restnctions As yet few states have actually
    defined the status of ground water heat pump systems in
    their statutes Their status is therefore subject to
    interpretation of state regulatory agencies. Most state statutes
    describe domestic use in similar language.
    Even if your well couldn t produce adequate water, you
    might possibly be able to use a ground water heat pump
    For installations where low well yields prohibit conventional
    design, a freezeprotected underground water storage tank
    immediately adjacent to the water supply well can be used to
    limit well pump cycling The tank is usually buned for
    architectural suitability and to avoid excessive heat loss or
    heat gain to the atmosphere Any watertight tank with an
    appropnate volume is suitable Tank volume vanes with heat
    pump water flow requirements Because of their low cost
    and water-holding capacity, septic tanks are often used for
    this application
    The heat pump extracts heat energy from the water in
    the tank until the water temperature is lowered to a
    predetermined limit (for instance. 40 F) A temperature
    sensor then signals the well pump to begin adding wanner
    ground water to the tank, thus displacing the colder water
    which is returned to the aquifer. The well pump continues
    pumping warmer water into the tank until a higher selected
    temperature is reached
    Use of a storage tank system in this manner can reduce
    the water well pump operating time, particularly for a
    reversible heat pump dunng spring and fall penods of
    frequent shifting between the heating and cooling modes
    However, the surface area of a small underground tank is
    inadequate to extract large quantities of heat from the
    surrounding earth, and such tanks do not significantly
    6
    [3-253]"
    

    -------
    reduce the maximum water well flows required for space
    heating with most heat pumps dunng severe winter weather
    In some situations dunng the spnng and fall, the heat
    pump can often operate solely from the water in the tank,
    since the house is heated at night and cooled in the daytime
    A general rule for sizing the storage tank is one gallon per
    square foot of living space to be conditioned.
    HOW MUCH ADDITIONAL
    WATER DO I NEED FOR
    DOMESTIC USE?
    The question of how much water you and
    your family will need for all of your purposes
    is also a determining factor in the cost of
    your complete well system
    The capacity required of the water
    system depends upon the water-using fixtures and the
    number of people and/or animals consuming the water
    The most important consideration is the demand
    requirement. This means the amount of water required in a
    given penod of time In a home, for instance, most of the
    water is used in the morning shortly after everyone awakes
    and in the evening around the dinner hour Motels and
    hotels have similar demand penods
    Peak penods usually last from 30 minutes to two hours
    Dunng this time, water systems must meet the demands of
    those using the system This means the combination of
    the well, the storage tank and the pump must produce the
    water continuously Special or emergency demand
    required for firefighting purposes should also be planned
    for farm installations For home installations, the demand
    penod lasts for about one hour
    If the rate of flow required dunng the demand penod
    exceeds the maximum rate at which water can be drawn
    from the well, the difference must be made up in storage
    capacity This must be accomplished so the user will
    continuously obtain water under pressure.
    Peak Demand Allowance	Individual Fixture
    Water Uses	for Pump	Flow Rate
    
    gpm
    gpm
    
    Column 1
    Column 2
    Household Uses
    
    
    Bathtub or tub-and-shower combination
    ZOO
    80
    Shower only
    1 00
    40
    Lavatory
    50
    20
    Toilet—flush tank
    75
    30
    Sink, kitchen—including garbage disposal
    1 00
    40
    Dishwasher
    50
    20
    Laundry sink
    1 50
    60
    Clothes washer
    ZOO
    80
    Imgation. Cleaning and Miscellaneous
    
    
    Lawn imgation (per spnnkler)
    Z50
    50
    Garden imgation (per spnnkler)
    Z50
    50
    Automobile washing
    Z50
    50
    Tractor and equipment washing
    Z50
    50
    Rushing driveways and walkways
    500
    100
    Cleaning milking equipment and milk storage tank
    400
    80
    Hose-cleaning bam floors, ramps, etc
    500
    100
    Swimming pool (initial filling)
    230
    50
    TABLE 1
    7
    [3-23~4]
    

    -------
    WHAT ABOUT WATER
    PUMPS AND PIPING
    SYSTEMS?
    Choosing a proper well pump is very
    important Two main factors will determine
    the proper size for the pump—water system
    demand in gpm and depth from the
    pumping level to the level of use In
    practice, pump installers prefer to oversize a well pump
    somewhat rather than to undersize it to allow for increased
    demand in the future An oversized well pump will be more
    rugged and will compensate for friction loss in the pipes,
    fittings and elbows and heat exchanger Skilled contractors
    can size the pump to precisely meet the demands of the
    system for maximum efficiency
    The pipes that deliver ground water to the heat pump
    and back to the recharge structure should be sized for the
    required water flow and the lowest fnction loss If smooth
    pipe, such as copper or plastic, is used the fnction loss will
    be lower than that for steel pipe at any given size. Plastic is
    attractive in many installations due to its lower cost low
    fnction loss and resistance to both corrosion and
    incrustation
    Water supply lines from the well to the building need
    not be insulated if protected from freezing by bunal below
    the local frost line. Freeze protection may be assured by
    using pitiess adapters on the well when possible or other
    freeze protection means above the frost line. Where long
    runs of honzontal pipe are required from the supply well to
    the building, they should be insulated with at least 1 /2-mch
    thick water-resistant insulation suitable for underground
    use. together with placement below the frost line to
    minimize heat loss and loss of efficiency Return lines need
    not be insulated, but they must be placed below the
    maximum anticipated frost depth Supply and return pipe
    lines should be separated enough to prevent heat
    exchange from taking place between the two Many times
    the well dnlling contractor or pump installer has installed
    the offset pipe just below the frost line where the
    temperature of the earth may be 33 to 36 F This can be
    determined by checking the water temperature at the well
    and in the house. If the difference is greater than three
    degrees, a new offset pipe should be buned at least 8 feet
    in depth. If you ignore the seasonal differences in water
    temperature, however slight, it will sabotage your
    installation.
    Copper pipe should not be run directly to the unit
    Plastic pipe is recommended for noise reduction and
    insulation qualities If hose is used, it should be capable of
    handling the pressure Row valves should be installed
    where they will not be heard On the return side, the
    discharge should be allowed to fall by gravity as much as
    possible to help reduce pumping costs and pressure drop
    Most of the controls and protective devices necessary
    for efficient and safe ground water heat pump operation
    are provided by the manufacturer and are located within
    the heat pump enclosure Usually the only control that the
    contractor must install, connect and adjust is the room
    temperature thermostat that has been supplied or
    recommended by the manufacturer If a water storage tank
    is installed, the contractor must also install the tank
    temperature control Mo^t of the electncal connections are
    self-contained and prewired with the heat pump unit Most
    heat pumps require a 220-volt. 60 hertz power supply from
    a separate circuit breaker and the main circuit box.
    Current an important factor, will often vary from
    manufacturer to manufacturer Individual manufacturer s
    ratings should alwavs be consulted
    To avoid corrosion, be certain that copper and
    aluminum wires have not been wired together All
    connections should be checked to make certain they ar
    secure. Proper disconnections and fuses are essential A
    disconnect switch should be placed near the unit and the
    well pump should have its own fused disconnect as well
    HOW CAN I LEARN IF MY
    WELL WILL SUPPLY
    ENOUGH WATER?
    The best source for this information is a
    qualified, professional water well systems
    contractor In selecting such a person or
    firm, you will be putting your trust in a
    person who has the knowledge and
    equipment to properly construct develop and test your
    well He is also familiar with state and federal requirements
    concerning well location in regard to septic tanks, drain
    fields, surface water and other wells
    In most cases, the water well contractor has many years
    of expenence in the area in which he operates. He has
    made a large investment in sophisticated equipment In
    some instances, the contractor himself may be a geologist
    or hydrologist or may retain such a scientist on his staff If
    not he has many other sources of technical information at
    his disposal. First and most important among these
    techrucaJ information sources is his file of well logs-
    records of your well or other wells dnlled in the area.
    These will help advise you of the approximate depth of
    your planned well, and can help predict the quality of the
    water you can expect However, a dnlling contractor cannot
    accurately predict what quantity or quality of water a new
    well wiD yield. Mo one can
    Most domestic wells are dnlled less than 200 feet deep
    Formations can vary in permeability, and therefore in
    yields. Even though a neighbor s well yields 15 gpm. the
    well in question may not produce that amount for several
    reasons The construction of the two wells may not be the
    same: perhaps the well screen openings or slots are of
    different size or the screen is of a different length.
    Construction alone does not affect well yield If a well is not
    8
    [3-2S5]
    

    -------
    properly developed, the yield will suffer Yet another
    important item to consider is the presence of other wells in
    the area If a neighborhood already has a substantial
    number of wells drawing from a low-yielding aquifer, the
    addition of more high-demand wells might cause
    problems for all concerned parties
    Before you make a financial commitment with a
    contractor ask him the following questions on well
    construction
    •	What will be the well's finished diameter and depth5*
    This can affect the cost of the well and the amount of
    water it can produce
    •	How much and what Kind of well casing will be
    required'5* Local sanitation codes may dictate how
    much steel or plastic protective casing must be used The
    final casing length will depend on the depth of the well and
    geologic conditions at the site
    •	If a well screen is required, what kind will be used?
    This will depend on the kinds of geological formations
    found in your area Screen selection is very important and
    you generally get what you pay for
    •	How will the well be disinfected to ensure high-quality
    dnnking water (if being used for domestic use in addition
    to heat pump useP
    •	After the well is dnlled, how will it be developed to
    produce an optimum amount of water5
    •	How will the well be sealed5
    •	Will the contractor furnish an accurate well log or
    record when the work is completed? A good well log
    provides detailed information on all aspects of your well's
    construction It will be essential years later if repairs or
    maintenance are required
    •	Will further treatment in the home be necessary after
    the well is completed'5 Water treatment equipment can
    range from a simple filter to expensive water conditioning
    systems Find out in advance how much water treatment is
    likely to be required in your area
    Ask a prospective contractor to itemize his cost
    estimates as follows dnlling—cost per foot: casing—cost
    per foot, cost of other matenals (dnve shoes, screens,
    seals, etc ). cementing, developing, pumping equipment,
    test pumping, and water treatment equipment
    When you need a water well, or work done on your
    present well, consult your local water well contractor first.
    He is the best qualified individual If you do not know a
    local contractor, contact local agncultural agents,
    suppliers of well equipment neighbors or the National
    Water Well Association. 500 W Wilson Bndge Road.
    Worthington. OH 43085, (614) 846-9355
    The contractor you select should consider all relevant
    factors when designing and testing a well for ground
    water heat pump use A well supplying a ground water heat
    *A contractor cannot alwavs determine in advance the depth at which
    an adequate water supply will be found Meighbonng wells offer
    some assistance but no definite assurance
    pump must be able to produce an adequate supply of
    water for an extended period of time, perhaps as long as
    20 out of 24 hours for up to 10 days at a time If the water
    demand is not only for the heat pump, but may also
    include the dishwasher, shower or water softener backwash
    at the same time, the total household demand may double
    the demand of the ground water heat pump alone Many
    existing wells may not be properly developed This means
    that the well screen was set in an inadequate aquifer or it
    was set too shallow in a good aquifer When in doubt, have
    the well dnlling contractor perform a pumping test to
    qualify or disqualify the well If a water problem is to occur
    it most likeiv will happen dunng the months oi Januan,
    and February when the demand on the well is the greatest
    Therefore, testing becomes a very important part of
    completing the well The usual methods of bailer testing or
    pumping into a bucket are now inadequate Insist that your
    contractor conduct a three-part test to establish the
    maximum flow and the specific capacity of the well
    Specific capacity is the yield of a well expressed in gallons
    per minute of flow for each foot of difference between the
    static water level (depth to the water in a well that has not
    been pumped for at least 24 hours) and the pumping level
    (the depth to the water in a well while the pump is
    running) The three parts to a proper well test are constant
    rate test recovery test and step test If your contractor
    follows these procedures, you can be confident that the
    yield figures your contractor determines will be accurate
    Remember, once a well is dnlled and developed the safe
    yield of the well is fixed. If a well is producing, for example.
    5 gpm it cannot be forced to produce 10 or 20 gpm by
    adding a larger well pump The yield of a well is controlled
    by the permeability of the aquifer and not the size of the
    pump Also, well screens are a must for sand and gravel
    geology to maximize yields and prevent the pumping of
    sand Well yields may drop over time due to incrustation
    This can be minimized through proper maintenance
    MUST THE WATER BE
    TREATED OR SOFTENED
    BEFORE IT PASSES
    THROUGH THE GROUND
    WATER HEAT PUMP?
    Poor water quality containing high
    concentrations of iron, calaum. magnesium,
    salts and other dissolved solids may cause
    scaling and incrustation in the heat exchanger
    piping. Corrosion of the water side heat
    exchanger by aggressive water," which appears to be a
    greater problem than incrustation, is inhibited by the
    9
    [3-2661
    

    -------
    formation of an oxide or hydroxide film Any ground water
    constituent that prevents the formation of this film or
    removes it will cause degradation of the metal Hydrogen
    sulfide is the most common corrosive agent with the water-
    side heat exchangers Although the cupro-nickel alloy (Mo
    706) heat exchanger is more resistant than the copper
    vanety to mechanical erosion and corrosion by brackish
    waters, neither metal shows acceptable resistance to
    dissolved hydrogen sulfide Concentrations as little as 0 5
    parts per million are known to cause corrosion of the
    metals The use of a stainless steel heat exchanger will
    help deal with this problem
    Chemical incrustation has not been a significant
    problem in existing installations of ground water heat
    pumps Every new. modified or reconditioned water well,
    including pumping equipment should be disinfected
    before bang placed into service The well and pumping
    equipment should be disinfected with a chlorine solution
    made up of one part household bleach (sodium
    hypochlonte 6 percent) and two parts water. Two quarts of
    this solution should be poured into the well for each 100
    gallons of water in the well. Biological incrustation, if
    encountered, is likely to be a problem throughout the
    entire domestic water supply system If bactenal infestation
    and subsequent blockage of the heat exchanger is a
    chronic problem, water treatment at the well before the
    water passes through the heat exchanger would be
    required. Due to the large volume of water used,
    conventional treatment would substantially increase system
    operating costs. A penodic maintenance program or
    chemical feed at the well can minimize this perplexing
    problem if it appears However, in some states regulations
    may prohibit the return of the water to the aquifer if it has
    been chemically treated. Contact your local authonties to
    be safe
    Strongly acidic water can cause deterioration of copper
    tubing. Ideally, the pH level of the ground water should be
    between six and eight, and the hardness reading (on the
    standard 0-30 scale) no higher than 10 Many ground
    water heat pump manufacturers design their equipment to
    reduce the effects of poor quality water, and most
    manufacturers provide optional features for applications
    that require special considerations.
    One way to prevent scale and increase resistance to
    acid detenoration is to use cupro-nickel instead of copper
    tubing, and it is now the industry standard. The cupro-
    nickel expands and contracts with temperature changes,
    and its surface tends to flake off mineral deposits and scale
    with each cycle In addition, the cupro-nickel alloy is
    corrosion resistant to nearly all ground water However,
    while the cupro-nickel alloy is more resistant than copper
    to mechanical erosion and corrosion by brackish waters,
    neither metal shows acceptable resistance to dissolved
    hydrogen sulfide. Concentrations as little as 0 5 parts per
    million are known to cause corrosion of the metals and
    stainless steel may be required
    When installing a ground water heat pump in a house
    with a water softener, be sure that the unit s water supply
    has been brought off the incoming water pipe at a point
    where it is not using softened water This is to avoid
    depleting the softener s salt supply because of the high
    amounts of water used to operate the heat pump
    Considenng these factors, it is not necessary to
    circulate your ground water through your home s water
    treatment equipment before it enters the heat pump, but
    have your water analyzed by a laboratory before making
    your investment
    Even in areas where ground water is not of dnnking
    water quality ground water heat pump applications are
    possible The heat pump can merely 'borrow the ground
    water for a time and return it to its onginal source,
    withdrawing 
    -------
    plumbing installed to allow for secondary use of the
    discharge water, if this is permitted, such as for lawn and
    garden watering when the ground conditions warrant it
    Most sewer systems cannot handle the large volumes
    of water which ground water heat pumps can produce (up
    to 10.000 or more gallons per day) Sewer lines may
    backup Tile fields will become overloaded. While ponds
    could be attractive and have multiple uses, they consume
    large amounts of land area, which would restnct their
    potential use in more densely populated areas Discharge
    to the land surface may create bogs, accelerate pollutant-
    leaching into ground water and form icy areas in the
    winter In addition surface discharge in some areas mav
    accelerate sinkhole activity Disposing of the water to a
    stream, nver or lake may be effective, but your local
    government may have specific regulations dealing with this
    issue. If the ground water used in the heat pump was of
    poor quality, discharging it to higher quality water will
    contaminate those sources Also, heating ground water
    may raise the temperature which would be harmful to
    surface water dwelling creatures Check with your local
    authonties before making your decision.
    In close quarters, care must be taken so that the
    discharge doesn t infringe on a neighbor s property Often,
    local ordinances prohibit any kind of discharge, and
    although vanances can sometimes be obtained, they can
    be costly and timeconsuming
    The disposal methods preferred by the National Water
    Well Association, from a water conservation standpoint, are
    secondary use of the water and returning the water to the
    production aquifer
    When returning the water to the onginal aquifer from
    which it came, the water should remain in a closed system
    There are several methods for returning the water to its
    aquifer They are using a single well for supply and
    disposal, using two wells and alternating withdrawal and
    disposal between the wells in winter and summer, and
    using two wells, but not alternating their function
    •	Single well—For return of water in a supply well,
    approximately 100 feet of vertical separation is required for
    every 12,000 Btu of heating or cooling produced per
    hour A typical domestic heat pump unit, with a 60.000-Btu
    capacity, would require 500 feet of separation in the well
    from the point of disposal to the point of supply. If 100 feet
    of vertical separation is needed, it probably would be
    unadvisable to use this system. Higher dnlling and
    pumping costs could make this system impractical in
    many areas. Also, local regulations may restnct the use of
    a single well for both potable water and return
    •	Alternating two wells—This method couid take
    advantage of any temperature vanations which may exist m
    the ground water from this process. In winter, a return well
    injects cooler water back into the aquifer In summer, the
    return well (now acting as a supply well) could withdraw
    this cooler water from the aquifer for more efficient cooling.
    The second well could be used in a similar way for warmer
    water Alternating supply and return may also be beneficial
    Heat Pump
    Injection Tube
    Gravel Pack
    WeM Screen
    Iniecuon Wdier
    \j/	ievd
    S\VL
    ttatenal
    Silt_ clay
    Very fine sand
    Purn
    Permeability Well Screen
    (GPO/Ft^J Length—(R)
    05
    160
    3/v>A
    12000
    375
    20
    FIGURE 8 Horizontal disposal well
    Heal J\imp
    SWl. v
    Sand
    CUjv
    Sand
    Casing (6-30' darrU
    • Injection Tube
    }
    Well i>c;e«ns
    RGCIRE 9 Shallow, large-diameter wells
    as a preventive maintenance measure This alteration in
    each well helps prevent clogging of the well screen a
    common problem This method of design is rarely
    practiced, probably due to its larger imbal investment The
    system would require an addrtional pump (one per well) and
    more piping compared to other systems
    • Two well system (non-altemating)—A general rule to
    follow is to dnll the return well to the same aquifer at the
    same depth as the producing well Return wells in sand
    arid gravel aquifers must have a screen to help prevent
    incrustation and facilitate water movement. Water is always
    returned below the water level to reduce precipitation of
    dissolved solids on the well casing
    If a return wed is dnlled. it must be placed far enough
    from the supply well to prevent an overlapping thermal
    effect between the two wells. Raphael G Kazman, in his
    report. Use of Twin Wells and Water-Source Heat Pumps
    for Energy Conservation in Louisiana, created a table for
    use by the project engineer or designer to approximate the
    needed spacing between the production and return wells.
    These wells alternate their roles. The well used for
    1 1
    [3-268]
    

    -------
    Open Hole
    Stone
    Formation
    Injection Tube
    SWL
    Casing
    Sand
    Crave) Aquifer
    " Well Screen
    FIGURE 10. Well recharge small-diameter disposal wells
    production in the summer is used for return in the winter
    and vice versa. Kazman reported that if each house in an
    entire housing development were equipped with twin wells
    and heat pumps, the return water of one property owner
    might be pumped by his neighbor The studies he
    conducted indicate that to maintain the same well
    discharges without danger of interference with neighbors,
    the spacing between the twin wells must be increased,
    possibly as much as 20 percent or more. To minimize
    interference and short-circuiting between neighbonng sets
    of twin wells, the summer well should always be located on
    the street side of any lot and the winter well should be
    drilled in the backyard, he says
    Two wells, even in the same aquifer, keep the
    temperature difference separate, if properly spaced,
    because underground water flows so slowly The spacing
    of the supply and return wells is dependent upon several
    variables, among which are- 1) selection of the optimum
    ground water heat pump based on available well capacity
    and operating cost. 2) the length of the cntical season of
    operation (overall duration of the heating season in the
    North, air-conditioning season in the south). 3) the actual
    number of days that the heat pump will be called upon to
    operate and the percentage of time during those days that it
    will actuallv be in operation 4) the aauifer
    characteristics permeability, thickness and specific
    capacity Spacing the supply and return wells at least 100
    feet apart is best for most locations For good aquifer
    conditions, this spacing might be less, while greater
    spacing may be necessary for poor aquifer conditions. The
    return well has to be constructed as well as. or better than
    the supply well—it is not just a dumping hole
    Theoretically, an aquifer will accept the same amount of
    water that it will yield In reality, however, it will only accept
    75 to 80 percent of its yield in return Therefore, an aquifer
    that will yield 18 gpm will only accept approximately
    14 gpm and the remaining 4 gpm will run out on the
    ground The contractor and homeowner should be
    concerned about the possible plugging of the return well
    by deposits of sand or high amounts of iron being
    present in the ground water Air dissolved in the water can
    also induce corrosion.
    It should be noted, however, that in aquifers with low
    permeabilities, gravity feeding of return water may not
    provide sufficient pressure to allow infiltration into the
    aquifer
    If the discharge water is returned to an aquifer other
    than the supply aquifer and the two aquifers are separated
    by a thickness of low-permeability matenal. interference
    should be minimal or nonexistant. Supply and return
    aquifers must be chemically compatible to assure that
    mixing of the two water types does not result in
    precipitation of salts or hydroxides from solution, which
    might lead to eventual plugging of the aquifer surrounding
    the return well.
    Local policies vary widely concerning the use of return
    weBs. Several states, including Wisconsin and Mini esota. do
    not allow any type of underground injection or return at this
    time Several others have adopted a general policy to
    discourage this type of disposal method. On the other
    hand. Oregon encourages return of this water Many of the
    other states have some form of permit or notification
    procedure Enforcement is often lax. however particularly
    for small domestic systems. Regulatory agencies
    commonly have statutory authonty to regulate these
    systems but no formal program. More than one-third of the
    states have no permit or notification requirements.
    Regulations for return of water to surface water
    generally correspond to the federal National Pollutant
    Discharge Elimination System standards Disposal to a
    leach field and septic tanks is generally not a problem, but
    12
    [3-269]
    

    -------
    is usually not recommended However, many states require
    that septic tanks be spaced a certain distance (generally
    around 50 feet) from a well Disposal to sewers is regulated
    on the state level in only four states The state of
    Minnesota, for example, had forbidden for many years the
    use of any type of return well However, the law was
    amended in late 1981 to allow the construction of a
    minimum number of return wells Provisions of the law
    said that the wells must withdraw from and return to the
    same aquifer, the wells must be constructed so as to allow
    for inspection of water quality and temperature, the system
    must be constructed as a completely closed svstem which
    is sealed against the introduction of foreign substances
    and the owner must agree to allow inspections by the
    health department. The law does not allow for a domestic
    supply well to be used in conjunction with a ground water
    heat pump
    Meanwhile, officials of Satellite Beach. Flonda.
    rescinded in early 1982 an ordinance that required
    homeowners with ground water heat pumps to also have a
    return well In March 1981 the council had approved a law
    requinng the return well But council members said the
    cost was prohibitive to homeowners
    Again, the point is check with your local officials
    WONT I BE IN DANGER OF
    DEPLETING MY PROPERTY'S
    GROUND WATER SUPPLY,
    NOT TO MENTION MY
    NEIGHBOR'S, IF 1 HAVE A
    GROUND WATER HEAT
    PUMP INSTALLED?
    Most problems regarding heat pump
    dewatenng have stemmed from improper
    determination of well yield Domestic wells
    are normally designed to produce enough
    water for household use only, which is usually
    300 to 400 gallons per day Ground water heating may *
    require 10.000 gallons of water or more per day in extremely
    cold weather. An adequate water well design for household
    usage may not be sufficient to also sustain a heat pump
    Uncontrolled overpumpmg and overdevelopment of the
    ground water may cause problems such as aquifer
    drawdown and well interference. Aquifer drawdown indicates
    that more water is being withdrawn from the aquifer than is
    being replaced and usually manifests itself by smaller yields
    and lower water levels in wells Pumping a well usually
    creates a cone-shaped depression of the water table (the
    two-dimensional surface representing the top of the ground
    water), with the lowest point on the cone being the well
    location where the water is being pumped With
    overpumping, two or more closely spaced wells may see an
    overlapping of their individual cones of depression This is
    called well interference and also is reflected by lower well
    yields, as some of the available ground water must now
    supply two or more wells instead of one
    The way to prevent water level declines is not to pump
    water to waste when the well is used to supply water to the
    heat pump, but to use it and then return it to the aquifer
    through a return well
    The spent water, which may have been used in the
    summertime to remove heat from the mtenor of a building,
    will be warmer than the native ground water In the winter
    on the otner hand it is cooler that the source of ground
    water
    The spent water, if returned too close to the production
    well will break through or shortly appear in the production
    stream Thus, if the volumes pumped dunng each season
    are nearly equal, the temperature of the ground water will
    not change significantly even after a decade or more of
    operation
    Where the water is returned into the same producing
    aquifer by way of the supply well or a second well, no aquifer
    drawdown or well interference will occur
    /Management of the heat balance within an aquifer is
    essential in urban areas where heat transfers between several
    users may have to be coordinated Spacing of private
    domestic wells is likefy to depend on property boundanes
    rather than the hydrologic characteristics of the aquifer
    under development. Random installation of ground water
    heat pumps could lead to thermal interference through
    improper well spacing Efficiency of the heat pump system
    would be considerafcift§Wuced where a sufficient amount of
    interference exists.
    Through careful planning and analysis of the aquifer
    pnor to housing construction, it is possible to avoid the
    problem of well 'nterference Production and injection wells
    can be spaced for optimum dissipation of thermal energy
    within the aquifer Well spacing should be based on the
    heating and cooling load for the proposed number of
    residential units to be built at a given location, as well as the
    hydrologic properties of the aquifer to ensure the efficient
    utilization of ground water for the operation of ground water
    heat pumps.
    Thus, it is crucial that the well yield be conectly and
    accurately determined by a qualified contractor
    13
    [3-270]'
    

    -------
    HOW EFFICIENT ARE
    GROUND WATER HEAT
    POMPS? HOW DO THEY
    COMPARE TO OTHER
    HEATING METHODS?
    The efficiency of a heat pump is measured by
    the number of units of heat energy output
    (Btu) obtained for each unit of heat energy
    input (kilowatt) This is called the Coefficient
    of Performance (COP) The COP is a
    measure of heat pump efficiency: the higher the COP. the
    more efficient the heat pump By precise definition, the COP
    is the heating output divided by the electncal energy input
    which can be wntten as. COP = H^E for the heating mode.
    The COP of a heat pump is more than one because the
    heat energy in pumps exceeds the input electncal energy it
    consumes. Energy efficiency ratio (EER), an alternative
    measure of cooling performance, is defined as the Btu per
    hour of useful cooling per watt of electncal power input The
    EER is equal to the COP (a dimensionless index of
    performance) multiplied by 3412.
    Conventional heating systems generally have lower
    Heat Pump Capacity
    Heat Pump
    Suppty
    
    Injecoon
    Summer
    Well
    \n)tCHon
    Water Row—Summer
    Heas Pump -
    Winter
    Wdl
    Supply
    
    
    
    X"
    
    	p.
    
    
    Summer
    Wei!
    Water Row—Winter
    Winter
    Well
    10 20 30 40 50 60
    Outside ^ir Temperature F
    FIGURE 12. Hypothetical heating load vs. outside air
    temperature ground water source heat pump
    Space
    Cooling
    FIGURE 11 Schematic diagram of water source heat pump wells
    Ohio Ground Water Temperature Range
    Ohio Design Outside Air Temperature Range
    jL.
    20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
    Outside Air or Ground Water Temperature (F)
    FIGURE 13 Typical heat pump performance trends
    accepted COPs than ground water heat pump systems
    Some average seasonal COPs of those systems under ideal
    circumstances are listed below
    ~ectrcai resistance furnace	1.0
    Natural gas furnace	0.80
    Coal furnace	0.60
    Fuel oil furnace	0.70
    In other words, a conventional natural gas furnace
    system, for every i 00 Btu of energy it consumes, produces
    70 Btu of heat or has an efficiency of about 70 percent tf
    property maintained. Heat pumps, on the other hand,
    normally have COPs greater than one An air toair heat
    pump typically has a COP of 1 5 to 2 0. The fact that heat
    pumps typically have COPs greater than one seems to
    contradict the laws of nature since more energy comes out
    of the heat pump than we put in. Actually, this is not the
    case because a heat pump merely uses electncal energy to
    transfer "free' thermal energy from the outside air or from
    ground water
    14
    [3-271]
    

    -------
    Ground water has been called 'nature s most efficient
    energy storage system " In addition to the advantage of high
    specific heat which was discussed earlier, ground water s
    temperature vanes little with the seasonal weather changes It
    is warmer than the air in winter and cooler than the air in
    summer Therefore, the heat pump output is also relatively
    constant year round It is for this same reason that the
    performance of the air to-air heat pump vanes more than
    that of a ground water heat pump system since the
    temperature of the air source is dependent upon outside
    weather conditions When air source heat pumps operate in
    extreme temperatures they consume large quantities of
    electncitv in order to operate effectively and must often rely
    upon a back up heating method (such as electrical
    resistance strip heating) dunng the winter to provide a
    comfortable home temperature Ground water heat pumps
    under operating conditions are about 25 to 75 percent more
    efficient than air-to-air heat pumps operating under optimal
    conditions *
    An example of the efficiency of the ground water heat
    pump is thus illustrated. An average house of 2.000 square
    feet of living area requires about 360.000 Btu per day for
    heating. Using a ground water heat pump with 45 F ground
    water and an outside air temperature of 20 F. it requires
    about 28 8 kilowatt hours (kwh) per day to heat the home to
    68 F. while the usual energy requirement for an electncal
    resistance heating system would be 108 kwh per day For
    every kilowatt hour of energy put into the system, you would
    be getting 3 6 times the Btu per hour out Thus, the ground
    water heat pump s COP is 3 6
    In the cooling mode, reversing ground water heat pumps
    are often rated on the basis of an energy efficiency ratio
    (EER). EER also represents output divided by power input
    which makes the high number desirable EER ratings for air
    to-air heat pumps fall between 6 8 and 9 0 Ground water
    heat pumps can reach EER ratings of 13 or more
    The following chart compares the COPs of the various
    systems and also shows the relationship between the energy
    input (what you buy) and the energy output of the system
    The energy output of the system is the energy input
    multiplied by the COP Note that the average COP of a
    ground water heat pump is significantly higher than the air
    to-air heat pump
    Energy Energy
    System	COP Input Output
    Electncal resistance
    10
    100
    100
    Fuel oil
    70
    100
    70
    Propane
    75
    100
    75
    Natural gas
    80
    100
    80
    'Computer simulations conducted for the (J S Department of Energy
    study Ground Water Heat Pumps An Examination of
    Hydrogeologic Environmental Legal and Economic Factors
    Affecting Their Use determined that the ground water heat pump
    uses 20 to 50 percent less energy for heating than the air source heat
    pump
    Air-to-air heat pump
    15
    100
    150
    Ground water heat pump
    23
    100
    280
    Reversing ground water heat
    32
    100
    320
    pump
    
    
    
    Direct cooling
    200
    100
    zooo
    The higher the COP the lower the annual operating cost
    of the system will be In companson. 100 Btu of energy will
    produce 320 Btu of heat from a reversing ground water heat
    pump but only 75 Btu from a natural gas furnace. This
    reduction in annual operating costs offsets the higher initial
    costs of a ground water heat pump svstem
    A computer simulation by the Mational Water Well
    Association of currently available ground water heat pumps
    located in nine cities throughout the United States predicts
    annual COPs ranging from 22 in Concord. New Hampshire
    (where 94 percent of the energy load was for heating), to 2 9
    in Birmingham. Alabama (where approximately 50 percent
    was for heating and 50 percent for cooling) In Concord,
    only 10 percent of the total energy consumed by the ground
    water heat pump system was used for supplemental eiectnc
    strip heat whereas an air to-air heat pump required 40
    percent for the same purpose By simulating a heat-only
    ground water heat pump and using direct heat-exchange
    cooling (with ground water) energy requirements were
    reduced 30 percent compared to the reversible cycle ground
    water heat pump This is a result of sizing to full heating
    design load rather than cooling load. With this strategy, the
    use of supplemental eiectnc strip heat can be substantially
    reduced or eliminated. However, some suggest that the use
    of supplemental eiectnc stnp heat which will probably only
    be needed for a few days a year, should be less expensive
    than greatly increasing the size of the heat pump system
    HOW RELIABLE ARE
    GROUND WATER HEAT
    PC1MPS?
    A properly designed ground water heat pump
    system is reliable because it is never exposed
    to extreme operating conditions. Air-t&air
    heat pumps are calculated to last 10 years
    because of their exposure to the outdoors.
    The compressor is an important part of any heat pump
    Its main function is to pump refrigerant vapor (Freon^) from
    a relatively low suction pressure to a higher deliveiy pressure
    The suction and delivery pressures are a function of the heat
    pump design and ground water temperature A large
    difference between the suction and delivery pressures will
    force the compressor to work harder for the same flow rate
    This requires more electncal input and places higher
    mechanical stresses on crankshafts, bearings and valves.
    High stresses often caused compressor failures in the
    earliest heat pump models In recent years, however
    compressors with better beanngs and improved vahnng have
    15
    [3-272]"
    

    -------
    been developed. Improved motor insulation has also been
    developed, and better motor cooling methods are being
    used In short compressors are more rugged and are
    protected by better controls There should be a fail-safe
    control system to ensure that the compressor is turned off if
    water pressure fails. Without this it is possible to freeze and
    subsequently destroy the heat exchanger
    The extra durability of today s heat pumps has lessened
    the requirement for numerous protecave devices and
    reduced the number of parts that can cause problems For
    example. 20 years ago heat pumps had many relays, today,
    most have only three
    According to some manufacturers, systems with a
    thermostatic expansion valve for refngerant metering are
    preferable to those with capillary tube metenng because they
    are adjustable for optimum operation under various
    conditions
    The reliability of ground water heat pumps has clearly
    improved, as evidenced by a preventive maintenance and
    service program conducted by the American Electnc Power
    Co in which detailed maintenance reports were shared by
    individual heat pump manufacturers between 1961 and
    1976 The findings showed that heat pump annual
    maintenance trendline values declined in each five-year
    NOTES
    300-
    200-
    100-
    0-1
    I Pnces shown for electncity and fuet oil are from a U & OOC analysis (Federal
    Register October 27 I 960) for region 5 (Oho Indiana. Michigan Illinois
    Wisconsin and Minnesota) The I980pnceshownfornaualgasisdlsofiomthe
    (J S DOE analysis but the projected future pnces are based on the assumption
    that decontrol of natural gas pnces between 1980and 1905cause natural gas
    pnces per Btu to rise from 50 percent of that for fuel orf *i 1980 to 75 and 90
    percent of those for fuel oil in 1905 and 1990 respectnch
    2. Propane pnces per gallon are likely to be approximated 63 percent of those for
    fuel oil (which is equivalent to 92 percent cf fuel oil per Bhil based on an earlier
    U S DOE analysis (Federal Register January 23 19801
    3 If world crude oil pnces increase more rapidly than assured for the (J S DOE
    analysis, fuel oil pnces would increase more rapidly than projected and propane
    and natural gas pnces would also be likriv to increase more rapdlv than
    projected. However dectncny pnces are unlikely to be sitf ¦imaly affected by the
    pnces of these fuels because most of the tlectmjiy consumed in Ohio is
    generauo witn abundant domestic coal and nuclear fuea.
    Natural Gas
    Electricity
    S"H
    r
    s
    15-
    u
    v
    u
    £
    10-
    5 -
    1980
    
    
    
    Inflation
    /
    10 Percent
    /
    
    5 Percent
    0 Percent ..
    Hi i i
    i
    £
    i -
    
    
    
    7
    
    /
    10 Percent
    //
    
    /
    5 Percent
    0 Percent.	
    r~r i
    r 1 M
    10-
    5-
    -
    7
    -
    /
    10 Percent
    -
    / i
    
    / /
    / 5 Percent
    ¦-i
    4:
    t
    
    I I i I
    i i l I
    1935
    1990
    1960
    1985
    1990
    1980
    1985
    1990
    'Night off peak power is likely to be available at 40 to 60 percent of prices
    shown.
    FIGURE 14 Projected future Ohio residential energy price trends
    16
    [3-273]
    

    -------
    interval from 1957 to 1976 for service both in and out of
    warranty
    Compressor failures constituted the major percentage of
    maintenance costs for individual components of the heat
    pump, followed by fans, refrigerant leaks and flow controls
    Today, some ground water heat pump manufacturers will
    offer compressor guarantees of 10 years Most offer at least
    a five-year guarantee
    Yet another indication of improved ground water heat
    pump reliability is its sales volume history Shortly after 1952.
    the year ground water heat pumps were first made
    commercially available sales were slow but increased
    steadily until about 1963 Then as a result of a high number
    of heat pump failures in the 1950s models, sales growth
    nearly came to a standstill The ground water heat pump
    industry hung tough and worked to improve its product. The
    industry corrected its faults and as a result ground water
    heat pump sales have risen sharply since the early 1970s
    and continue to grow
    IF GROUND WATER HEAT
    PUMPS ARE SO TERRIFIC,
    WHY DIDN'T PEOPLE USE
    THEM LONG AGO?
    The basic principle of the heat pump was first
    proposed by Nicholas Camot in 1824 This
    theory was advanced 30 years later when
    Lord Kelvin proposed that refrigerating
    equipment could be used for heating
    Because of cheap, readily available fossil fuels, the heat
    pump remained a researcher s cunosity until the mid 1930s
    when several manufacturers designed custom systems
    using the heat pump principle for comfort heating.
    Following the delays caused by World War II. commercial
    production of heat pumps began in 1952 and production
    and use has continued to grow since
    THEN WHY AM 1JCJST MOW
    LEARNING ABOUT GROUND
    WATER HEAT POMPS?
    Most homes have natural gas. fuel oil. or
    propane space and hot water heating
    systems Much of this equipment is relatively
    inefficient primarily because these fossil fuels
    were abundant and cheap when it was
    installed Subsequent fuel pnce increases have significantly
    increased the cost of heating with these systems
    The Arab oil embargo of the early 1970s finally made
    Amenca realize that it had to reduce its energy consumption
    and costs When gasoline was 35 cents a gallon (and fuel oil
    about the same), and electricity was a penny to 2 cents a
    kilowatt hour, it didn t make much difference in energy
    savings to a homeowner whether he installed an oil furnace
    natural gas furnace, air to-air heat pump or ground water
    heat pump, except that ground water heat pumps cost more
    to install Now with residential heating oil at S1 21 or more
    per gallon, natural gas at over $4 50 per thousand cubic feet
    and electricity at 6 5 cents per kilowatt hour it makes an
    important difference to every energy consumer *
    In addition according to the National Water Well
    Association there has been a general ignorance about
    ground water Many mistakenly believed ground water
    resources were limited. Also, many believed ground water
    heat pumps were only able to utilize ground water of 60 F or
    warmer ground water contained chemicals which would
    promote corrosion or scaling of the heat exchanger ground
    water flowed in underground rivers or veins, requinng a
    water witch to locate them Of course, as we have already
    shown and explained, ail of these beliefs were false
    The reason air to-air heat pumps are so widespread is
    not that they are better—they are not It is simply because
    the air is right there, surrounding us We are not really sure
    the ground water is there, unless we see it flow from the well
    'Some homeowners might therefore benefit from investing in
    modifying ex sang equipment to increase its efficiency or replacing it
    with one of the more efficient systems now available—the ground
    water heat pump—especially i the existing equipment is near the
    end of its useful life (which is usually about 20 years for furnaces)
    1 HAVE A 20-YEAR-OLD
    HOUSE. CAN A GROUND
    WATER HEAT PUMP BE
    RETROFITTED?
    Retrofitting ground water heat pumps is
    certainly possible However, each application
    must be surveyed and information reviewed
    before making the final determination of
    materials and methods. It is possible that
    under certain pre-existing conditions the necessary revisions
    for retrofitting will make the use of a ground water heat
    pump less economically attractive to the homeowner
    The University of Dayton (Ohio) Research Institute
    studied a one and one-half story brick house built within the
    Dayton city limits in 1934 that had its natural gas gravity-flow
    furnace replaced with a 2 1/2 ton ground water heat pump
    The total energy consumption rate for the household was
    reduced to less than one-third of the previous rate
    The supply well for the project was dnlted within a few
    feet of the house to a depth of 40 feet The water, after it
    passes through the heat pump, is discharged into the city
    17
    [3-274]
    

    -------
    storm sewer via an access drain in the basement of the
    house
    The total cost of the conversion was about 56,800 This
    inducted the well and pump system cost of about $1,250.
    upgrading the electncal service from 90 to 200 amps,
    ductwork and mam system installation Included in this was
    the non-tnvial cost of removing the old furnace
    The COP for the ground water heat pump in this house
    was calculated to be 2 8 The natural gas furnace that the
    heat pump replaced had a COP of 0 7
    Here are some key factors that a homeowner should
    have assessed by a qualified heating, air-condibomng.
    ventilation contractor
    •	The building must be inspected for such elements as
    insulation type, amount and quality of insulation, window
    and door area; presence of good storm windows and storm
    doors; attic spaces for excessive heat loss.
    Recommendations should be made to provide a lower heat
    transfer between the occupied space and the extenor
    •	Determine the total heating and cooling load under
    easting conditions and the heating and cooling load when
    recommendations are completed.
    •	The building site and surrounding geologic conditions
    must be assessed to determine if adequate supplies of
    acceptable quality water can be made available and to
    determine if adequate and proper effluent disposal (return of
    the ground water) can be arranged, preferably by use of a
    return well. A qualified water well contractor will need to
    assist here in most cases.
    •	Inspect the existing air distnbution system. Is it
    adequate in size7 Is there distnbution to all occupied areas?
    Check the return system. Will there be only one large return?
    If so. the air distribution system will short-circuit and
    modifications must be made.
    S'>nce ground water heat pumps circulate warm air at
    lower temperatures than conventional gas and electnc
    furnaces, a larger volume of air must be circulated at lower
    velocity to provide the same total comfort requirement. This
    rails for larger air ducts than conventional furnaces require.
    A conventional furnace delivers air that's about 120 to 140
    F A heat pump delivers air at only about 100 to 110 F. so it
    must move a larger volume You need about twice the
    normal-size ducts, or double the number, to accommodate
    the flow with a larger fan turning at fewer rpm. A faster fan
    with the same ducts won t do; the efficiency would drop, the
    noise would increase and the room would seem drafty.
    Suppose that a duct must deliver 2,000 cfm of air This
    means that the supply diameter should be approximately 18
    inches. The approximate rectangular duct choices are 8 x
    40.10 x 30, 12 x 24.14 x 20 and 16 x 17 inches. The
    proper return duct diameter is 22 inches, and the
    rectangular choices for the return are 12 x 36.14 x 30. 16 x
    26, 18 x 23 and 20 x 20 inches Your contractor will have
    access to tables that will enable him to select the proper size
    ductwork for your application. The heat from any heat pump
    decreases in unit cost as the required temperature of the air
    is lowered, thus the importance of property sized ductwork.
    Coming up with the proper air distnbution system in
    retrofit applications may be more difficult than in new
    construction because the consumer and installer are forced
    to live with much of what is already installed. The
    consequences of an undersized system can be noisy air
    ducts and diffusers. drafty rooms, reduced heat pump
    performance and unsatisfied customers Some systems will
    require no modifications except for new supply and return
    fittings for the new equipment. Others may require the
    addition of several supply and return branches in order to
    assure satisfactory performance Additionally, there will no
    doubt be some systems that the contractor may choose not
    to work with Remember any air conditioning or heating
    system is only as efficient as its distnbution
    While a heat pump can equally well heat water for floor
    or baseboard heating, it is not satisfactory to do summer
    cooling through the floor or baseboard units If these
    methods are chosen for winter heating, summer air
    conditioning will still require a system for circulating cooled
    and dried air
    •	Check for the possibilities of removing existing heating
    and cooling equipment and installing the ground water heat
    pump in conjunction with the existing ductwork with a
    minimum of revisions. Do not use existing ductwork if major
    restrictions or connections to new equipment prevent a
    smooth air flow to and through the system
    •	Select the proper heat pump equipment for the job A
    proper equipment selection can only be made by calculating
    the design heat loss from the house The oversized unit will
    require a greater water flow and a larger electncal supply. In
    short, indiscriminate overs izing of a ground water heat pump
    may be an expensive and inefficient proposition
    After determining heating and cooling load requirements
    and equipment space available, select the equipment for
    supply and return duct connections Mate directions with the
    existing building supply and return ductwork if it is to be
    used Make sure equipment is accessible for service and
    adjustments Equipment should be sized to provide
    continuous air flow to the space with a minimum amount of
    drafts. A lower outlet and duct velocity is preferred
    Effective insulation of the structure should be your first
    aim because it will reduce your operating costs with an
    efficient heating system. Trying to make a poorly insulated
    house comfortable with a ground water heat pump will only
    result in the unhappiness of all concerned. If you first do not
    reduce the heat loss to the lowest practical levels, you will
    not succeed in achieving the lowest cost of operation.
    Retrofit equipment can come in several configurations,
    which is helpful to the homeowner These are the unitary,
    split-system and addon designs.
    The umtaiy design format probably the most popular,
    features the entire unit in either a vertical or horizontal
    configuration, contained in a single cabinet requinng only
    sheet metal, water piping, electncal and condensate drain
    connections.
    In split-systems the Freon® to-air heat exchanger and
    blower are located in one enclosure and the compressor
    and Freond to-water heat exchanger in another The air
    18
    [3-275]
    

    -------
    handling portion of the split-system can be either honzontal
    or vertical Since the air handling section is smaller than a
    complete unitary system of the same capacity, greater
    freedom of location is possible. Additionally, the compressor
    section of a split-system can be located in a spot convenient
    for water piping and service These systems are also useful
    where noise isolation is cntical
    The add on system is similar to the split system in that
    there are two major components The Freon-^ to-air heat
    exchanger, however, is placed in the air stream of the
    existing forced air furnace Generally, these systems are sized
    from one-half to two-thirds of the design heating capacity of
    the structure This is primarily due to the lower air moving
    capabilities of the existing unit and air distribution system
    The existing furnace can be retained for use when full
    capacity heating (due to very cold weather) is needed. Add
    on systems are less expensive in initial cost than a full-sized
    unitary heat pump However, through part of the heating
    season, the existing furnace will be operating The economic
    trade-off associated with the add-on system should be
    outlined for you. the customer
    CAN THE GROUND WATER
    HEAT PUMP BE USED FOR
    OTHER THAN HOUSEHOLD
    HEATING? ~
    Ground water heat pumps are used to heat
    and cool warehouses, shopping malls, office
    buildings, hospitals, aircraft hangers,
    greenhouses, bams—just about any type of
    properly constructed and insulated structure
    that needs efficient economical heating and cooling.
    Another means of utilizing ground water heat pump units
    for residential heating and cooling is district heating
    systems. This involves a centralized distribution of ground
    water to multiple end-users. Each end-user would use
    individual heat exchangers and compressors for its own
    heating and cooling needs Common piping may be
    installed to deliver the ground water to service. Costs for
    obtaining, pumping, maintenance and disposal of the
    ground water can be mutually shared by all enckisers.
    IS GROUND WATER HEAT
    POMP-CONDITIONED AIR
    ADEQUATE FOR THE
    COLDEST WINTERS AND
    HOTTEST SUMMERS?
    Yes. if the equipment is property sized for the
    structure and its heating and cooling loads
    Again, remember that a ground water heat
    pump is different from an air to-air unit
    Ground water temperatures remain nearly
    constant year round, they show little if any effect from air
    temperature changes That is the advantage of the ground
    water heat pump The compressor does not have to work
    harder (although it does work longer) when the temperature
    reaches extremes, unlike that of an air to-air heat pump
    WHAT HAPPENS ON A 0°
    FAHRENHEIT DAY WHEN
    MY HEAT PUMP OR WELL
    PUMP FAILS?
    What would you normally do0 Wouldn t
    you get it repairecP Of course you
    would We are not being flippant here
    It s just that this is a common objection
    given to the use of ground water heat
    pumps and one that, when examined, is unfair
    Natural gas furnaces Fail, electncity goes off (all furnaces
    require electncity to operate), snowstorms make it
    impossible for fuel oil trucks to make deliveries, and so on
    In other words, failures can and do occur with any home
    heating and/or cooling system. With a temporary failure you
    could rely upon some other heating method, such as a
    wood burning stove or electnc space heating unit until your
    heat pump unit or well pump is brought back on line. This is
    no different than what you would do with any other system
    Ground water heat pumps are highly reliable when
    property designed and installed Because of the way they are
    constructed, they have fewer problems than their air to-air
    cousins If you have a heat pump regularty inspected and
    serviced by qualified industry professionals you are less likery
    to have to be cold in the middle of January
    WILL VARIATION OF THE
    WATER TABLE AFFECT THE
    PERFORMANCE OF MY
    GROUND WATER HEAT
    PUMP?
    It could, but not necessanty If the water table declines
    it is only a problem for you it if declines below your
    well pump s operating level. If it drops beiow that mark
    you must have the pump reset to prevent it from
    running while dry and subsequently burning out
    leaving your home without water and your ground water
    heat pump without a water source Another alternative would
    19
    [3-276]"
    

    -------
    be to have the well drilled deeper
    If the water table rises, you must make certain that your
    return well will not overflow and spill out onto the
    surrounding ground.
    Remember, your ground water heat pump will have no
    consequential appreciable effect on the water table level if
    the supply well is properly designed, constructed, developed
    and tested, and if a return well of similar standards is
    incorporated
    However, if the system is designed for possible water
    discharge into sewers, streams or some other surface facility,
    the water available for recharge may be reduced and result
    in the lowering of the water table under certain hvdrologic
    conditions
    WHAT ABOUT HUMIDITY IN
    MY HOUSE DURING THE
    WINTER AND
    DEHUMIDIFICATION IN THE
    SUMMER?
    Because the ground water heat pump only
    needs to heat the air it circulates to about
    110 F as opposed to 140 F for more
    conventional home heating systems, the air is
    subsequently not as dry as that found in
    conventional methods. Thus, a pleasant humidity level is
    maintained in the home dunng the dry winter months.
    Water cooling with the ground water heat pump is
    very efficient and provides the amount of dehumidi-
    fication we expect from conventional air conditioning
    dunng the humid months of summer
    system could allow the Freon1® and/or oil to enter the
    ground water system
    While the presence of a small quantity of oil in ground
    water may make the water undnnkable for a brief period, the
    Freon'® poses no risk.
    The Freon^ Products Laboratory of El Dupont De
    Nemours and Co has explained the company s findings
    concerning health risks from exposure to Freon9 12 and
    Freon '¦> 114. two refrigerants commonly used in heat
    transfer systems
    "Sufficient evidence is now available to indicate that
    double-wall heat exchangers are not necessary and that the
    health hazard in the event of leakage (of Freon" 12) is
    negligible, according to Dupont
    The solubility of Freon'® 12 in water decreases as the
    temperature increases. For example, the solubility at 140 F
    is about one-third that at 70 F The amount of Freon*® 12
    dissolved in water depends upon the pressure of the product
    supplied to the water and is not affected by the pressure of
    other gases that might be present such as air. Since Freon-5
    12 is not very soluble in water, it dissolves very slowly when
    the pressure is increased
    Long term tests using rats and dogs determined that no
    tissue damage occurred in either group of animals fed
    substantial quantities of Freon1Z The Dupont study
    concluded that The health hazard from the use of
    Freon^ 12 in direct coils for heating water seems extremefy
    slight'
    Animal ingestion studies with Freon"* 114 in relatively
    large amounts show no effect according to Dupont
    Additional studies found that the solubility of Freon'3 114 in
    water is very low
    In short there is little health nsk or ground water
    contamination nsk from the heat pump system's refrigerant
    In addition, the likelihood of a leak is very low. because the
    refrigerant does not mix with the water at any point
    WHAT IF THERE'S A
    REFRIGERANT LEAK? WONT
    IT BE HARMFUL TO MY
    FAMILY OR OUR PETS AND
    COULDN'T IT CONTAMINATE
    MY GROUND WATER
    SUPPLY?
    It is unlikely that ground water heat pumps themselves
    could cause ground water pollution The units do.
    however, contain refrigerants and oils. It is conceivable,
    by a worst-case perspective, that a rupture in the .
    plumbing or an event causing a pressure loss in the
    HOW MUCH MONEY CAN I
    SAVE USING A GROUND
    WATER HEAT PUMP?
    We have intentionally waited to answer this
    question We wanted to make certain
    that you read and understood all that
    came before this question before you
    started thinking about the savings a
    ground water heat pump can provide
    To properly evaluate the economics of a ground water
    heat pump system, its initial cost (equipment and
    installation) and its annual operating costs must be
    considered. The initial cost of the ground water heat pump
    system is higher than that of conventional systems, but its
    lower annual operating costs and maintenance
    requirements, ability to produce heating as well as cooling
    20
    [3-277]
    

    -------
    WASHINGTON
    IDAHO
    NEVADA
    01 OWADO
    IWSAS
    KENTUCKY
    .vVSSOURI
    ALIKORNIA
    OKLAHOMA
    ARIZONA
    NEW MEXICO
    "1 Western Mountain Ranges—6"
    *2 Alluvial Basins—6"
    *3 Columbia Lava Plateau—6"
    *4 Colorado Plateau—6"
    *5 High Plains (Ogallala Aquifer I—I"
    *6 Glaciated Central Region—1"
    "7 Unglaciated Central Region—4"
    *8 Unglaciated Appalachians—6"
    "9 Glaciated Appalachians—6"
    *10 Coastal Plain—4"
    Average Coat for WeH and Pumping System lor 10 GPM
    Average Cost (or Cased Well Onty
    Average Well Depth Is 200 Feet
    250
    S3.770
    100-500
    5470
    5140
    52.0005 000
    400
    S6 1M
    2001.000
    5610
    5245
    52.6007 000
    200
    S3C42
    50-1.000
    >470
    5105
    51 5506000
    300
    >4 029
    110-500
    5610
    5175
    52.0005.000
    300
    sidse
    50-500
    5610
    5175
    51 2505.000
    150
    Si 600
    50-300
    5386
    585
    51 2503.750
    200
    S2C58
    100400
    5470
    5|C5
    5|.5504.000
    250
    $2600
    200500
    5470
    5140
    523506.000
    100
    41.385
    50-200
    5360
    552
    51.1503.750
    75
    S640
    25250
    5360
    542
    S| 2503250
    *2.400*2.900
    s 1.600*2.000
    Source Data: DOE CS 20060-5.120-
    E.*hib
    -------
    make it economically attractive.
    How much money you ultimately save will depend on
    your house, your family's lifestyle, where your house is
    located, the temperature of your ground water supply, the
    type of equipment you select the water discharge method
    you select and other vanables, including interest rates and
    available tax incentives
    Based on U.S. Department of Energy projections of
    energy costs, a gas heating/cooling system is the most
    economically attractive of current system choices in most
    parts of the United States. However, the ground water heat
    pump, with no well costs included, has an economic
    advantage over all other systems evaluated (including
    conventional air to-air heat pumps, electncal resistance
    heating/electncal cooling systems and oil heating/electncal
    cooling systems) in aght of the nine test cities of the study
    (Houston, Texas, is the exception).
    With the cost of a return well included, payback of
    incremental first costs for installation of a ground water heat
    pump system is usually achieved within an eight-year life cycle
    penod. The shortest payback penods are indicated for
    northern climate installations. Using the air-to-air heat pump
    or the electric heating/electnc cooling system as the
    alternate choice, payback penods range from two to 10
    years. Using the oil heating/electric cooling system as the
    alternate, payback penods range from one to more than TO
    years.
    Let s look at some actual installations and the savings
    that have been realized.
    A 2.880-square foot, two-story, four-bedroom house with
    basement located near Decatur, Illinois, had a ground water
    heat pump installed that utilized 54 F ground water Dunng
    the 198061 heating season it cost the homeowners $ 173 43
    to power their ground water heat pump In companson. the
    heating costs using the following alternative methods in
    Decatur would have been "2 fuel oil—$620. propane—
    $555. electnc resistance—$415. air to-air heat pump—s245.
    natural gas—$235
    An average house (1200 square feet) located in
    North-wood. North Dakota, required 39 million Btu of energy
    from the ground water for space heating dunng the 1981
    calendar year The resident s electncal energy cost was
    approximately $220 to operate the heat pump and water
    pump for that year Equating this system s operation cost to
    conventional heating systems', this cost compares to $471
    with electnc resistance. $550 with propane and $675 using
    fuel oil heating (natural gas isn t available) On the other
    hand, a larger house (2300 square feet) located in Lanmore
    required 77 million Btu of energy from the ground water to
    space heat the house on an annual electnc operation cost of
    approximately $325
    The Butler Rural Electnc Cooperative Inc. of Hamilton, -
    Ohio, decided to replace the 100-kw electnc boiler and 30-
    ton chiller with a water to-air exchange via air handling
    equipment it had been using in its 6.600-square foot office
    facility with a ground water heat pump system The results of
    this project are listed below
    Heating
    Degree Days 79-80 5.340
    Degree Days 80-81 5,045
    Office Facilities Only
    6.600 Square Feet
    1979-80 Old Equipment
    100-Kw Boiler
    30-Ton Chiller
    1980-81 New Equipment
    4 4-Ton Ground Water Heat Pumps
    and Weil Pump
    Total kwh to heat and cool
    Average kwh per month
    Average kwh per day
    Total cost per year
    117555
    9.796
    322
    5634797
    Average @ 0.054 kwh
    36302
    3,042
    100
    $2,190.12
    Average @ 0 06 kwh
    Average cost per month
    $52839
    $ 18231
    Average cost per day
    $1739
    $600
    Average cost per square foot
    $ 961
    $332
    Total kwh to heat area
    71.415
    26.683
    Total cost to heat area
    $3,856.41
    $ 1.60098
    Average cost per square foot to heat area
    $ 584
    $ 242
    Total kwh to cool area
    46.140
    9.819
    Total cost to cool area
    $ 2.49136
    $58914
    Average cost per square foot to cool area
    $377
    $ 089
    TABLE 2
    22
    [3-279]"
    

    -------
    The important factor to you is what the unit costs to be
    installed and how long it will take for the unit to pay for itself
    and subsequently show a real savings to you.
    If you want a ground water heat pump system and don t
    have a water well, the cost of installing a well (and the cost of
    a return well, if that is the water discharge method selected)
    must be considered in your total cost estimate
    Let s take a 150-foot well, a typical depth in many parts
    of the county And let s take a moderately high dnlling pnce
    of $10 per foot, which includes the cost of the well casing.
    So. we are now talking about51300 With the addition of
    the pumping system, the pressure tank and the plumbing up
    to the house, another $700 has been spent
    A return well will cost approximately the same amount as
    the supply well if it is constructed to switch roles with the
    companion well If it is not built to take full advantage of the
    aquifer system, then the cost of the well pump can be
    deducted—approximately 5500.
    A. Qectnc resistance heat
    1,000000 Btu
    (3.413 Btu/kw x 100 percent efficiency)
    Ground Water Heat Pump Compared to Other Systems
    Make a Companson of Met Cost per Million Btu/Hour of (Jsable Heat
    -= 293 kw x	C per kwh = 5	
    B. Natural gas
    1 000.000 Btu
    100,000 Btu/therm x 75 percent efficiency*
    -= 1333 therms x	C per therm = $.
    ('Assumes spark ignition, automatic flue damper & proper sizing)
    C Propane gas
    1,000.000 Btu
    91,800 Btu/gallon x 75 percent efficiency*
    = 14 5 gallons x	C per gallon
    = $
    ('Assumes spark ignition, automatic flue damper & proper sizing)
    D *2 Fuel oil
    1.000.000 Btu
    140,000 Btu/gallon x 70 percent efficiency*
    = 10.2 gallons x	C per gallon = $ .
    ("Assumes flame retention burner, automatic flue damper & proper sizing)
    E. Airt&air heat pump (with demand defrost)
    1,000,000 Btu
    (3,413 Btu/kw x average COP of 1.75
    F Ground water heat pump
    1,000,000 Btu	
    (3,413 kwh x average COP of 2 75*
    -= 167 kw x	< per kw = $.
    -= 107 kw x	C per kw = $ .
    ("Includes cost of pumping water and auxilliary heat)
    Compare Energy Costs as Follows.
    Highest Cost per Million Btu 2 Lowest Cost per Million Btu =
    	How Much More You Can Expect to Pay for Higher Cost Energy.
    23
    [3-23U
    

    -------
    Mow a heat pump' Say you have a 2.000-square foot
    house and you need 60,000 to 80,000 Btu for heating. The
    system will cost anywhere from $1,900 to 54.700 The total
    cost of a ground-water heat pump system, therefore, can run
    between $5,600 and $8,400 Average initial costs for
    conventional heating systems are lower Some of these with
    the cost of a cooling system included, are listed below
    Air to-air heat pump	$3,500
    Natural gas furnace	$2300
    Electric resistance	$1500
    Electnc furnace	$2500
    Propane	$2 700
    Thus, the ground water heat pump is expensive
    According to a market survey conducted in 1980 (Scherrer)
    of 65 respondents in the ground water heat pump industry,
    the most significant bamer to the increased use of these
    systems is the high initial cost
    But let s look more closely at the potential savings
    question
    Cost-effectiveness is the key that convinces most
    homeowners to select a high-efficiency heating system
    Consumers are typically willing to invest in energy saving
    devices where there is a proven energy-savings and the
    incremental cost is affordable.
    The cost-effective economics of the ground water heat
    pump should be understood. The accompanying table gives
    an illustration of the cost-effectiveness of the ground water
    heat pump You could calculate comparison costs for your
    TABLE 3
    Types of Energy Sources and Heat Content with Present-Day Operating Costs
    Type of Energy	Units Gross Heat Content Usable Heat Content Fuel Cost Cost— 10.000 Btu
    "2 Fuel oil
    gallons
    140.000 Btu/gal
    84.000 Btu/gal *
    1 20/gal
    14 29C
    Propane gas
    gallons
    91,000 Btu/gal
    54.600 Btu/gal *
    7138C/gaL
    1307C
    Natural gas
    therms
    95,000 Btu/th
    57.000 Btu/th*
    35C/th
    6 14C
    Electncity (resistance)
    kwh
    3.413 Btu/kwh
    3.413 Btu/kwh
    4 192C/kwh
    1228C
    Electncity (A/A heat
    pump standard model)
    kwh
    6.826 Btu/kwh
    6.826 Btu/kwh"
    4.192C/kwh
    6 14C
    Electncity (A/A heat
    pump efficiency)
    kwh
    8533 Btu/kwh
    8533 Btu/kwh"*
    4.192
    -------
    TABLE 4
    Efficiency*. Percent
    Natural Gas, Cu. Ft
    Fuel Consumption per Million Btu
    Propane, Gallon Fuel Oil, Gallon
    Wood". Cords
    35
    
    
    206
    
    40
    2.422
    27 3
    180
    0 104
    45
    2.153
    24 3
    160
    0093
    50
    1.938
    21 9
    144
    0083
    55
    1.762
    199
    13 1
    0076
    50
    1.615
    182
    120
    0069
    65
    1.491
    168
    11 1
    —
    70
    1384
    156
    103
    —
    75
    1292
    146
    —
    —
    90
    1.077
    —
    —
    —
    95
    1.020
    —
    —
    —
    Electrical Power Consumption per Million Btu
    Heating (kw-hr)	Cooling (kw-hr)
    
    Heat Pumps
    
    Heat Pumps
    Electnc Resistance Equipment
    Air Source Water Source
    Air Conditioner
    Air Source Water Source
    (100 percent)*
    (17)* (34)*
    (22)*
    (2.2)' (32)*
    293 1
    1724 862
    133 2
    1332 916
    "Ohio seasonal efficiency or COP (see text)
    "Soft wood (8.000 Btu/lb)
    HOW WILL HAVING A
    GROUND WATER HEAT
    PUMP AFFECT THE VALUE
    OF MY PROPERTY OR MY
    ABILITY TO SELL IT?
    As consumers become more and more
    energy-savings conscious, they will demand
    that a house have an energy-efficient heating
    and/or cooling system such as the ground
    water heat pump If your house has such a
    system, it will make it all the more attractive to a prospective
    purchaser, should you decide to selL The less it costs to live
    in your house, the more buyers can afford to spend to
    purchase it from you. Many bankers are now seeing energy-
    saving devices as the key to qualifying homeowners for
    mortgage loans.
    COULDN'T 1 USE THE
    GROUND WATER HEAT
    PUMP TO PRODUCE HOT
    WATER FOR BATHING AND
    COOKING?
    Many ground water heat pump systems
    come with domestic hot water generation
    options. When equipped with an auxiliary
    heat exchanger, a ground water heat pump
    can provide some hot water heating with
    approximately the same COP as that obtained in providing
    space heating. When equipped with an auxilEary heat
    exchanger, a heat pump operating in its cooling mode can
    provide some hot water heating without adding to the power
    consumption required for space cooling
    The water heating attachment uses an electnc water'
    heater connected to a second heat exchanger coil on the
    heat pump A small pump recirculates the tank water
    around the heat exchanger to maintain a constant
    temperature of 120 to 160 F When the heat pump is not in
    use or cannot supply enough hot water, eiectnc resistance
    heat supplements the system Small air to-air heat pumps
    are also available to heat water economically
    25
    [3-282"]
    

    -------
    WHAT IF I CAMT USE A
    WELL?
    Waterto-air heat pumps, as the term
    suggests can be adapted to water
    supplies other than wells, such as a
    freshwater lake or a stream
    Another alternative to a well system
    would be a closed-loop, earth-coupled system.
    The closed-loop heat pump system requires only that the
    heat exchanger be buried in contact with moist earth In
    using closed loop exchangers, there is no depletion of the
    aquifer, since no water is withdrawn from the ground. The
    earth-coupled exchanger is filled one time with potable water
    or other heat exchanger fluids, therefore, it does not
    contaminate the heat pump by precipitating out minerals
    from the soil
    Two general types of earth-coupled systems have been
    used with water-to-air heat pumps. The first type is a vertical
    heat exchanger. The second type is the earth-coil or
    Ground Level
    Cap
    Brass MPT Adapter
    Service Une
    Water Flow
    Casing
    Clamp
    Water Row
    PVC MPT Adapter
    Aquifer Water Level
    5" Casing
    Dip Tube
    Wetted
    Pipe
    Sealed Casing
    Geothermal Well
    FIGURE 16 Sealed casing geothermal well
    horizontal heat exchanger A serpentine length of plastic
    pipe buned 4 to 6 feet below the eaith s surface is called an
    earth-coil or ground loop
    Both horizontal and vertical earth-coupled exchangers
    utilize low-wattage circulator pumps to send water from the
    heat pump out through the continuous closed-loop to
    exchange heat with the earth and back to the heat pump
    The vertical heat exchanger is constructed by a water
    well dnlling contractor The water from the heat pump is
    circulated to the bottom of the well and exchanges heat with
    the water in the well surrounding the pipes as it nses to
    reenter the heat pump This flow is achieved by means of a
    low wattage inexpensively operated circulation pump
    Vertical heat exchanger wells are filled only once and do not
    draw water from the earth.
    The horizontal serpentine earth-coil has two plastic
    exchanger pipes in a single trench 6-inches wide and 6-feet
    deep. In the case of a double layer design, the trench is
    partially backfilled after laying the first pipe, then completely
    backfilled after the second. In urban areas, earth coils can be
    layed out in a curved pattern around the boundary of a lot
    Heat exchange will drop to only 10 to 20 percent of normal
    performance if the soil around the pipe becomes dry When
    multiple pipes are to be buned in the same trench, the
    horizontal or vertical separation required between pipes is 2
    feet. The length of the earth-coil required will vary with the
    climate For example, in Oklahoma, where many of these
    systems have been installed, approximately 300 linear feet of
    wetted pipe or 450 linear feet of dry pipe per nominal ton of
    heat pump cooling capacity is required.
    In the northern (IS where heating is clearly dominant
    and cooling is of minor importance. 10 to 25 percent of
    propylene glycol (JSP should be used in the closed loop
    vertical heat exchanger to prevent freezing of the water in the
    heat pump exchanger
    With a property sized heat pump, duct system, water
    piping and water pump, the midwinter COP according to
    advocates of the earth-coupled heat pump, averages from
    2.8 in northern climates to 3 2 in the middle (J S Their
    performance is reported to be higher in autumn and spnng
    Another popular heat pump system common in
    commercial buildings makes use of recycled water in a
    dosed loop. The water temperature in the cfosed water
    source heat pump must be maintained within a narrow
    degree range. Therefore, a cooling tower is required for
    cooling the water in the summer, and a boiler is required for
    heating the water in the winter The requirements of the
    boiler and cooling tower reduce the overall operational
    efficiency of this type of heat pump system
    26
    [3-233]
    

    -------
    WHAT ABOUT SOLAR
    ENERGY AND GROUND
    WATER HEAT PUMPS?
    The ground water heat pump has the unique
    ability of being able to take advantage of
    future advances in solar collection and heat
    storage technologies. Because the ground
    water heat pump is a water to-air heat pump,
    it can easily be expanded to accept improved solar collectors
    and more efficient thermal energy storage Where use of a
    well is not possible, a water to-air heat pump could be
    combined with a closed cycle system whereby water in a
    storage tank could be heated by solar collectors. The water
    in the tank would not need to be heated beyond the 50 to
    70 F range through the use of solar panels. When the cost-
    effectiveness of these efficiency-augmenting accessones
    justifies their use. the ground water heat pump can be used
    as a dual-source solar assisted heat pump that obtains heat
    from both the ground water and the solar collectors It has
    not been demonstrated that the solar energy gained can
    even come close to paying for solar collectors at the present
    pnce of 525 to 575 per square foot or more
    WHAT LAWS AND
    REGULATIONS SHOULD I BE
    AWARE OF WHEN
    CONSIDERING THE USE OF
    A GROUND WATER HEAT
    PUMP?
    Federal state and local regulaDons impose
    restrictions and mandate various
    requirements for well construction, ground
    water use and quality and effluent disposal,
    but they will not significantly obstruct the
    implementation of ground water heat pumps in the long-run
    The Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 was enacted by
    Congress to ensure that public water systems are adequately
    supervised by the states This act requires the federal
    Environmental Protection Agency to adopt regulations for
    state underground injection programs. Heat pumps which
    use return wells or discharge water in a manner which could
    affect dnnking water supplies may be subject to regulations
    as a Class V well discharge system States are required to
    participate in inventory and impact assessments of all Class
    V wells This may include heat pump return wells, depending
    TABLES
    Summary of Ground Water Heat Pump Use and Effluent Disposal Regulations by State**
    State
    Water Use
    To Recharge
    Wei
    To Surface
    Water*
    To Land*
    To Septic
    Tank*
    To Sewer"
    Alabama
    No permit needed
    to use water for H P
    under domestic
    category
    Simple permit required bv
    Water Improvement
    Commission Well regulated
    as Class V well under
    Underground Injection Control
    Program (UIC)
    Theoretically
    covered bv
    NPDES—however
    this system usually
    not equipped to
    consider small
    domestic use so in
    most cases could
    just discharge
    vnthou a permit
    Not a problem if
    discharge to land
    owned by H P user
    A loophole in
    regulations—this
    type of discharge is
    allowed—if tank is
    big enough and far
    enough from well
    Would propao.
    allowed almost
    anvwnere—
    although in ma
    areas would be
    cost prohibitive
    Alaska
    Mo problem to
    obtain water nghts
    Mo mechanism to require a
    permit or to prevent this type
    of injection well
    Arizona
    No problem to -
    obtain water use—
    Uls into domestic
    category—no
    permit needed
    Wm be regulated by rule as
    Class V well under UIC when
    the state oboura pnmacy
    Arkansas
    No permit needed
    for water use of this
    type
    Permit required by Dept. of
    Pollution Control and Ecology
    as Class V well under UIC
    'If no information is provided in this column regulations pertaining to this type of discharge are similar to those in Alabama
    "Small-scale domestic heat pump utilization only
    27
    [3-284]"
    

    -------
    TABLES
    (Continued)
    State
    ' Water Use
    To Recharge
    Well
    To Surface To Septic
    Water' To Land* Tank* To Sewer"
    California
    32 counties out of
    58 total require
    pennits for all
    wells—no real
    problems though
    At present there are no
    regulations. In the future, may
    be regulated by the regional
    water quality control boards
    and through UIC
    
    Colorado
    Mo permit needed
    for a well that has a
    yield less thjn 13
    gpm
    Permit required by state
    engineer
    
    Connecticut
    Diversion permit
    required for use of
    more than 50 000
    gpd
    Permitted as Class V well
    under UIC
    
    Delaware
    No problem to use
    water—would be
    classified as a
    domestic well—no
    permit required
    State policy is to encourage
    neinjection Wells will be
    permitted through UIC as
    Class V well
    
    Flonda
    A permit would be
    required for this
    volume of water
    use—but not a
    senous problem in
    most pans of state
    Permit required by Dept. of
    Environmental Regulation as
    Oass V well under (J1C
    
    Georgia
    Mo permit needed
    for use less than
    100.000 gpd
    Remjfcoon of cooling water is
    allov^ed in state Mo permit is
    required for this
    
    Hawaii
    Classified as a
    domestic well—so
    no problem to
    obtain water use
    A regulation exists that
    requires permission for
    disposal wells and wastewater
    disposal—however not
    enforced at present
    
    Idaho
    Mo permit needed
    for domestic use-
    except in critical
    ground water
    area—need a
    permit for any use
    more than 13 000
    gpd
    Permit will be granted if water
    quality remains the same
    Mo problem except in cntical ground water areas where recharge back to the
    aquifers urauld be required
    Illinois
    Domestic use
    classification—no
    permit needed
    Heat pump return wells are
    unregulated. The state EPA
    has the jurisdiction to permit
    them but has chosen not to
    do so at the present time
    
    Indiana
    Domestic use—no
    permit needed
    Conventional and cooling
    water recharge wells not
    regulated—though Stream
    Control Board has theoretical
    authority Permitting
    regulations currently being
    Board of Health
    permit—no special
    problem to obtain
    considered
    *1f no information is provided in this column regulations pertaining to this type of discharge are similar to those m Alabama
    28
    [3-235]-
    

    -------
    TABLES
    (Continued)
    To Recharge	To Surface	To Septic
    State	Water Use	Well	Water*	To Land*	Tank*	To Sewer*
    'owa	No permit needed The state is not administering
    for domestic use the UIC Heal pump wells
    must be registered with (J S
    EPA Users are encouraged to
    consult with Iowa Geological
    Survey before construction
    Kansas
    A water
    No regulations at present but
    
    jppropr^uon
    will proDdDK' require J permit
    
    pemv would be
    as Class V well of (JIC
    
    needed
    
    Kentucky
    Private use—no
    Will probably be regulated as
    
    permit required
    Class V wed under (JIC
    Louisiana
    No permit required
    Permit required as Class V well
    
    
    of UIC
    Maine
    No permit needed
    Permit required by Water
    
    for this type of
    Bureau of Dept. of
    
    water use
    Environmental Protection
    Maryland
    A permit would be
    Permit required at county
    
    needed for use of
    level One county has banned
    
    this type
    heat pumps
    Massachusetts
    No permit needed
    Registration will be required
    
    for this type of
    with the Division of Water
    
    water use
    Pollution Control as Class V
    
    
    well under UIC
    Michigan
    No permit needed
    No permit required by Water
    
    for this type of
    Resources Commission as
    
    water use
    long as heat pump has a heat
    
    
    exchange rate less than
    
    
    120.000 Btu/hour or has no
    
    
    chemical additives
    ¦Minnesota
    No permit required
    Permit required by Dept. of
    
    
    Hearth. Dnnking water well
    
    
    may not be used as supply
    
    
    well Water must be reinjected
    
    
    to same aquifer in a dosed
    
    
    system. No other type of
    
    
    disposal allowed
    Mississippi
    No permit required
    Permit required as Class V well
    
    
    of UIC
    Missouri
    No permit needed
    Permit required by Dept. of
    
    
    Natural Resources unless heat
    
    
    pump is limited to single
    
    
    family residence or is limited
    
    
    to eight or fewer single family
    
    
    residences with a combined
    
    
    injection/withdrawal rate of
    
    
    600 000 Btu/ hour
    Montana
    Certificate of water
    Class V well of UIC
    
    nght is needed—no
    
    
    senous problem to
    
    
    obtain
    
    Nebraska
    No permit needed
    Permit required as Class V well
    
    
    of UIC New regulations
    
    
    possible in summer of 1983
    "If no information is provided in this column regulations pertaining to this type of discharge are similar to those in Alabama
    29
    [3-285]
    

    -------
    TABLES
    (Continued)
    To Recharge	To Surface	To Septic
    Water Use	W
    -------
    TABLES
    (Continued)
    State
    Water (Jse
    To Recharge
    Well
    To Surface
    Water"
    To Land*
    To Septic
    Tank'
    To Sewer'
    Tennessee
    no permit needed
    for water use less
    than 50 000 gpd
    Heat pumps will be regulated
    by (J1C Proposed rules
    exclude domestic heat pumps
    from permit requirements
    Commercial and industnal
    heat pumps will be permitted
    by rule as Class V well of (J1C
    
    
    
    
    r
    No ptrmu needed
    for water use
    ¦\uthonzed b\ rule os CIjss V
    well ot UIC
    
    
    
    
    Utah
    Permit needed for
    use of any type
    Class V well of UIC
    
    
    
    
    Vermont
    Mo permit needed
    Probably will be regulated as
    ~ass V well under UIC
    
    
    
    
    Virginia	No permit needed Currently considenng
    regulations that would require
    a general national pollutant
    discharge elimination system
    permit for small heat pumps
    and a specific NPDES permit
    for large units
    Discharge permit not required
    on single family residence
    Anything larger requires
    permit from Dept of Ecology
    West Virginia	Mo permit needed Return wells are Class V wells
    under 
    -------
    WHAT ABOUT ENERGY TAX
    CREDITS THAT I MIGHT
    RECEIVE IF I INSTALL A
    GROUND WATER HEAT
    PUMP?
    At the time this was written, there was no
    federal tax credit available to homeowners for
    having installed a ground water heat pump
    (Revenue Ruling 81 304) While you may
    have heard of someone that made such a
    deduction by perhaps having described his unit as
    "geothermal equipment" "solar water unit" or "solar heat
    extractor,' and apparently had the deduction approved by
    the Internal Revenue Service, that is not correct According
    to the IRS, essentially what has happened is that the IRS has
    not caught this deduction. Ground water heat pumps,
    despite whatever other title that might be given to them,
    simply do not legally qualify for energy tax credits currently
    being offered by the federal government Legislation has
    been introduced into both the House and Senate to amend
    the tax codes to specifically include ground water heat
    pumps for energy tax credits
    Despite the federal government's position, several states
    such as Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Idaho, North Dakota and
    South Dakota, for example, have granted tax credits to
    homeowners using ground water heat pumps. Typically,
    these credits provide that there will be no increase in the
    property tax valuation on the property, there is no sales tax
    assessed on the equipment and some states will offer
    income tax credits
    It is best to check with your state s taxation or energy
    offices to be certain
    I HAVE AN AIR-TO-AIR UNIT
    INSTALLED AT MY HOME
    NOW. CAN I CONVERT W TO
    A WATER-TO-AIR ON IT?
    Such a conversion is possible by trained
    professionals For several years the Fred
    Rosenau family of North Dakota had been
    living in a home equipped with an air to-air
    heat pump system.
    The major disadvantage of using an air-to-air heat pump
    in North Dakota is that air temperatures are often too low for
    economical use in the winter when heat is needed and too
    high in the summer when cooling is needed Rosenau noted
    that as soon as the outside air temperature reached 0 F (-18
    C). his air to-air heat pump would no longer kick in. forcing
    obvious savings that it could bring Such a change would
    him to rely on a more expensive electnc resistance backup
    system.
    Rosenau was familiar with the concept of using ground
    water as the source of energy in a heat pump system So a
    year and-a-half ago. with the help of B Simek of Simek
    Refngeration in Fullerton. he decided to convert his air-to-air
    heat pump to water
    Rosenau had a couple of advantages when he started
    the project Nine hundred feet from his house there was an
    old test well which was producing 72 F (22 C) water.
    Rosenau also owns his own backhoe and was able to lay the
    pipe from the well to the house himself
    Simek states that the heat pump conversion itself was
    not difficult and was essentially a matter of replacing the air
    evaporator with a water exchanger This summer, however,
    the new condenser unit failed, apparently due to a
    manufacturer s defect Although the part will be replaced by
    the company without charge, the malfunction has resulted in
    several months of downtime
    All in all, Rosenau and Simek have been pleased with the
    operation of the converted heat pump system Dunng the
    winter months. Rosenau estimates that the air-to-air heat
    pump (and necessary backup system) would have cost
    between 54 and $5 a day to operate. With the water to-air
    system, it cost Rosenau less than s2 a day to heat his 1.880-
    square foot home, plus a basement apartment between
    November 1980 and May 1981 The backup system was
    never needed, even with the thermostat set at a constant 70
    F (21 C). Essentially what needs to be done is to replace the
    air evaporator with a water exchanger This is a procedure
    that would be beyond the abilities of the average
    homeowner
    We do not recommend such a change, despite the
    invalidate any warranties or responsibilities presently charged
    to the manufacturer We strongly urge that you use
    equipment only as it was designed.
    MY HEATING, AIR-
    CONDITIONING
    CONTRACTOR SAYS THAT
    HE DOESN'T WANT
    ANYTHING TO DO WITH
    GROUND WATER HEAT
    PUMPS.
    Part of this attitude may be a result of the
    problems found in the early designs of the
    1950s As has been explained, those problems
    have been eliminated.
    Your contractor may also not totally
    understand ground water as a heat source or a heat sink
    Most HVAC contractors have been installing air-to-air heat
    32
    [3-2891
    

    -------
    pumps, and ground water heat pumps are something new
    to many of them Most of us are skeptical of something new
    until it has been proven to us As more and more
    homeowners demand ground water heat pumps, more and
    more HVAC contractors will educate themselves to the
    advantages and the savings of the ground water heat pump
    Ground water heat pump installations usually require the
    combined talents of a water well systems contractor and an
    HVAC contractor While it may be difficult to find firms with
    both skills, they are in fact growing in number Local heating
    equipment suppliers or the National Water Well Association
    can put \ou in contact with a f-mri in your area
    WHY AREN'T THE MAJOR
    HEATING AND AIR-
    CONDITIONING EQUIPMENT
    MANUFACTURERS
    PROMOTING THE WIDE-
    SPREAD USE OF GROUND
    WATER HEAT POMPS?
    They are slowly coming around to the
    promotion of the ground water heat pump
    You must understand that they haven't really
    been promoting the use of the air-to-air heat
    pump for that many years They have made
    significant financial commitments to air to-air heat pump
    equipment and are perhaps somewhat reluctant to cut into
    what has proven to be a profitable product line
    Manufacturers are now realizing that in most parts of the
    nation adequate ground water yields are available to operate
    residential and small commercial building heat pump units.
    Meanwhile, exisong smaller ground water heat pump
    manufacturers have had a chance to establish their product
    line and to thrive
    Presently, the ground water heat pump industry is in its
    infancy: In 1981, it is estimated that only 30,000 systems
    were sold in the United States. Partly for this reason,
    manufacturers are reluctant to adopt even the most obvious
    and well-died innovations For example, most manufacturers
    design ground water heat pump units for optimal efficiency
    in the cooling mode Increased consumer demand could
    encourage more manufacturers to incorporate existing
    design innovations for greater efficiency in the heating
    mode This can increase efficiency by approximately 33
    percent in cold northern climates
    I LIVE IN THE CITY. CAN I USE
    A GROUND WATER HEAT
    PCJMP?
    Ground water heat pumps can be installed in
    some urban and suburban areas if they utilize
    dedicated water systems not interconnected
    with the domestic water or sanitary systems
    For example, the city of Hilliard Ohio,
    adopted legislation in 1982 that -^ould not prohiDit using
    wells for ground water heat pumps, but wouid establish
    controls to protect the domestic water supply of others in the
    aty. The legislation would permit the aty engineer to turn off
    the ground water heat pump systems if the domestic water
    supply would become threatened
    Water-to-air heat pumps could be adapted for use m an
    urban setting One way would be to integrate heat pump use
    with city water supplies Water could be piped in. run
    through the heat pump and returned to community storage,
    since the water is in no way contaminated on its way
    through the heat pump Or it might pass through the heat
    pump before being metered or used inside the house The
    borrowed' water in either scenano would be metered and
    priced at reduced levels
    Yet another idea is to link several houses, all the
    apartments in a building or an entire community into a
    network of ground water distnbuton and return.
    A condominium project in downtown Columbus. Ohio.
    i itiliTPg ground water heat pumps. Weils were dnlled and
    permits obtained from city officials to allow the discharge of
    the ground water into the city storm sewers
    In shon. it is technically feasible to use a ground water
    heat pump in a city or a suburb However local government
    restnctions or local ground water conditions may limit its use
    Check with your appropnate authorities
    HOW SHOULD A GROUND
    WATER HEAT PUMP BE
    SELECTED?
    Select your unit only with the cooperation of a
    qualified, dependable heating and air
    conditioning contractor in conjunction with a
    qualified, dependable water well systems
    contractor Ground water heat pumps come
    in many different types and sizes Climate and building
    design are crucial factors to be considered in determining
    which ground water heat pump will operate most efficiently
    and economically to meet your particular heating and/or
    cooling needs
    Choosing a ground water heat pump unit that is smaller
    than the heating load calls for will mean that the unit cannot
    supply enough heat during the coldest pait of the winter
    33
    [3-2SO
    

    -------
    choosing a unit that is larger than required will cause the
    unit to stop and start frequently throughout the winter, which
    reduces system efficiency The heat pump should, therefore,
    be sized as close to the calculated heat load as standard
    sizes permit
    After the heating load calculations have been completed
    and the heat pump is sized this information should be
    shared by the contractor with the manufacturer from whom
    the heat pump is being selected. Some manufacturers may
    even require a set of construction plans of the house so they
    can perform the heat load calculations and size the unit
    themselves. In either case, the contractor and the
    manufacturer should be in close contact so the proper
    equipment can be selected Your particular situation may
    even cause the contractor to recommend that two or more
    smaller heat pumps be installed, which is called zoning Or
    some other design alternative may be suggested.
    The Air-Conditioning and Refngeraton Institute (ARI) has
    published A Standard for Ground Water Source Heat
    Pumps. ARI develops and establishes equipment and
    application standards and certified performance of heating
    and cooling products.
    The purpose of the standard, according to ARI. "is to
    establish, for ground water source heat pumps definitions
    and classifications, requirements for testing and rating,
    specifications, literature and advertising requirements:
    performance requirements, safety requirements, and
    conformance conditions
    The standard applies to factory-made residential,
    commercial and industrial units. The current ARI ground
    water source heat pump definition says that a unit "consists
    of one or more factory-made assemblies which normally
    include an indoor conditioning coil with air moving means,
    compressors) and refngerant-to-water heat exchangers),
    including means to provide both cooling and heating
    functions. When such equipment is provided in more than
    one assembly, the separated assemblies shall be designed
    to be used together, and the requirements of the rating
    outlined in the standard are based upon the use of the
    matched assemblies."
    Once the heat pump has been selected, the proper
    distnbuton system must be designed.
    Equipped with the knowledge you have gained from this
    book you will be better able to select your contractor,
    understand the equipment and its performance, and better
    appreciate your energy savings
    WHEN SHOULD I DECIDE
    AGAINST A GROUND WATER
    HEAT PUMP?
    bviousiy. if you live in an area with inadequate
    or poor quality ground water that can t be
    used with a ground water heat pump, you
    already face the most senous limitation Also,
    if other heating and/or cooling methods
    appear to be more efficient on the long term basis than the
    ground water heat pump, then ground water equipment may
    not be for you.
    If you live in a northern climate and can survive summer
    without cooling, or in a southern climate that erases the
    need for winter heat you would not need the more costly
    reversing ground water heat pump A single-cycle heating or
    cooling ground water heat pump may be for you and still be
    more cost-effective than an air to-air heat pump
    WHO MAKES GROUND
    WATER HEAT PUMPS?
    There are ground water heat pump
    manufacturers throughout the United States.
    Canada and Europe. Some companies are
    large and some are small.
    To contact ground water heat pump
    manufacturers, wnte or call the companies listed in this
    booklet
    WHAT SHOULD 1 LOOK FOR
    IN SELECTING A
    MANUFACTURER?
    ore than likely, you won't be selecting a
    manufacturer. You II be selecting a
    distnbutor or installer that has already made
    a product line decision. Ask him what led
    him to that company Using the knowledge
    you have obtained from this book, assess his answers and the
    product literature he makes available to you
    WHAT'S THE FUTURE
    MARKET OF THE GROUND
    WATER HEAT PUMP?
    n 1976 ground water heat pump sales were
    approximately 10.000 units. In 1980 that figure was
    estimated at 30.000 units.
    The Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute
    found that 48 percent of all new houses with central
    air conditioning built in the United States during 1978 had
    heat pumps (of all types) That figure grows each year
    In 1979. Air Conditioning. Heating and Refrigeration
    News, a trade magazine, reported that its market research
    found that the ground water heat pump market would grow
    30 to 35 percent annually
    Ground water heat pumps are often most cost-effective
    for new homes, since the retrofit of water pipes and heating
    34
    [3-29T]
    

    -------
    ducts is very costly Further, the new home market is very
    large The National Association of Home Builders estimated
    in 1981 that approximately 20 million new family units will
    be required in the United States during the 1980s.
    Nevertheless, retrofitting represents the greatest potential
    for energy savings on a statewide basis, and it becomes
    increasingly cost effective as energy costs nse The retrofit
    market also is large Approximately 600.000 or 5 percent of
    all homeowners, are expected to replace their heating
    systems each year
    The National Water Well Association has estimated that
    the market could grow to upwards of 750.000 units a year,
    based on the following reasoning There are approximately
    12 million existing domestic water wells in the United States,
    of which approximately 600.000 need rehabilitation each
    year By 1985 approximately half of these homeowners will
    use that opportunity to retrofit their house or business with
    ground water heat pumps, accounting for a 300.000 unit
    market according to NWWA. In addition, there are about
    400.000 new houses constructed each year that use ground
    water supplies and could potentially also use a ground water
    heat pump NWWA Executive Director Jay Lehr predicts that
    by 1990 75 percent of all new houses m the (IS built on
    quarter-acre lots or larger will be heated by ground water
    heat pumps.
    WHY IS THE NATIONAL
    WATER WELL ASSOCIATION
    SO ACTIVELY PROMOTING
    THE USE OF A HEATING
    AND COOLING SYSTEM?
    Like all Amercans. the National Water Well
    Association is concerned about Amenca s
    dependence upon foreign energy resources
    We believe that we all should do what we can
    to decrease our energy consumption while
    maintaining the comfort of our standard of living. Besides,
    why should we bum a precious chemical resource such as
    petroleum?
    And of course, the use of ground water and water wells
    and water well equipment is in the interests of those
    members of the international ground water industry we
    represent. The ground water heat pump is but a part of
    those interests.
    HOW CAN I GET MORE
    INFORMATION ON GROUND
    WATER HEAT POMPS FOR
    MY SPECIFIC APPLICATIONS?
    While you may contact the manufacturers
    that we have listed in this book, we
    suggest that you contact your local
    heating and air-conditioning contractor If
    he can t help vou contact local HVAC
    suppliers, electnc cooperatives. HVAC trade organizations or
    the National Water Well Association for a list of contractors
    m your area who are familiar with ground water heat pumps
    For even more information, review the catalog of
    matenals available on ground water heat pumps from
    NWWA and place your order today
    The following matenals are suggested for more
    information on ground water, wells and heat pumps-
    To order, contact the National Water Well Association/
    500 W Wilson Bndge Rd./Worthington, OH 43085/
    614-846-9355
    When You Need a Water Well. 5 50
    Amenca s Pnceiess Ground Water Resource - 1977. $ 50
    Heat Pump Anthology II - 1982 $6.25
    Ground Water Heat Pump Installation in Michigan ¦ 1983 s5
    Water Source Heat Pump Handbook -1983. (Call for pnce)
    Additional reading:
    Standard for Ground Water Source Heat Pumps 1982 Air
    Conditioning and Refrigeration Instrtute. 1815 North Fort
    Myer Dr Arlington. VA 22209 $4 50
    Guidebook to Water Source Heat Pumps 1981 National
    Conference of State Legislatures. 1125 Seventeenth SL. Ste
    1500. Denver. CO 80202
    35
    [3-292".
    

    -------
    WATER-SOURCE HEAT POMP
    MANUFACTURERS
    This list of water-source heat pump manufacturers is as
    complete as possible pnor to date of publication
    Information comes from a questionnaire and
    company brochures For the most accurate information
    contact each individual manufacturer.
    Amencan Air Filter, Allis-
    Chalmers Co
    Environmental Control Div
    Residential GWHP Dept
    PO. Box 35530
    Louisville. KY 40277
    Telephone- (502) 637-0325
    Contact Robert Newton
    Distnbution US
    Literature available: Yes
    EneKZon
    Water-to-air residential units
    Cooling capacity range—
    9500 to 62.000: heating—
    12300 to 68,000
    Amencan Solar King
    P O. Drawer 7399
    Waco. TX 76710
    Telephone (817) 776-3860
    Contact Chuck Cagle
    Amencan Sun-Sol
    Samlin Enterprises
    701 S Dixie Dr
    Vandalia. OH 45377
    Telephone. (513) 898-9733
    Literature available: Yes
    Geo-Thermal Ground Water
    System
    Aug G BarkowMfg Co
    Inc.
    2230 South 43rd Sl
    Milwaukee. WI 53219
    Telephone. (414) 671-1790
    Contact Robert F Barkow
    Distribution: Throughout
    U.S. and Canada by 150
    distributors
    Literature available. Yes
    Weatherwise
    Water to-air units for
    commercial applications.
    10.000 to 27.100 Btu
    cooling-11.500 to 28.900
    Btu heating.
    BardMfg Co
    Evansport Rd.
    PO Box 607
    Bryan. OH 43506
    Telephone (419)636-1194
    Contact James R. Bard
    Distnbution U S. Canada,
    overseas
    Literature available Yes
    Bard
    Water-to-air units for
    residential & commercial
    use. Cooling—31.400 to
    37,400 Btu. heating—
    27200 to 34.850 Btu
    Borg-Wamer Corp, York
    Div.
    P.O Box 1592
    York. PA 17405
    Telephone (717) 864-7890
    Contact George Simonson
    Literature available Yes
    Tnton
    Water-to-air units with
    cooling capacity of 19.000
    to 40,000 Btu Heating
    capacity range of 22500 to
    45.000 Btu
    California Heat Pump
    2314 Michigan Ave
    Santa Monica, CA &0404
    Telephone (213)829-9275
    Contact Bob Lodge. Herb
    Rose. Steve T release
    Distnbution: U.S. & Canada
    through 61 representatives
    Literature available: Yes
    California Heat Pump
    Water-to-air units for
    residential & commercial
    use Residential cooling is
    13000 to 61 000 Btu
    Heating— 15.000 to 67,000
    Commercial heating—7.000
    to 390.000: cooling—8.000
    to 410,000
    Cantherm Heating Ltd
    8089 Trans Canada Hwy
    Ville St Laurent Quebec
    Canada H4S 1S4
    Telephone- (514) 3344879
    Contact Sven G Oskarsson
    Literature available: Yes
    Aquatherm and Terra therm
    Water to-air and closed loop
    earth coupled heat pump
    systems
    Carrier Corp
    Carrier Parkway
    Syracuse, NY 13221
    Telephone: (315) 432-6779
    Contact Local distnbutor
    Distnbution. CI S & export
    Literature available. Yes
    Weathermaker
    Water-to-air units for
    residential and commercial
    applications. Cooling range
    for residential is 14.000 to
    80.000 Btu. heating—
    17,000 to 82,000
    Commercial cooling—6.500
    to 80.000. heating—9 000 to
    82.000
    Command/Aire Corp
    PO Box 7916
    Waco. TX 76710
    Telephone: (817) 753-3601
    Contact Ralph Heaterty
    Command/Aire
    Water-to-air residential and
    commercial units
    Residential cooling—9500
    to 64,000: heating—13500
    to 94,000. Commercial
    cooling—88.000 to 438.000.
    heatng— 128,000 to
    608.000
    Dunham Bush Inc.
    175 South St
    West Hartford. CT 06110
    Telephone. (203) 249-8671
    Contact Ronald B Winkel
    Distnbution Throughout
    U.S by 100 distnbutors
    Literature available. Yes
    Dunham-Bush
    Commercial water to-air heat
    pumps with cooling range of
    1 08MMBH to 4 21 MMBH
    heating range of 1 55
    MMBH to 5 11 MMBH
    36
    [3-293]
    

    -------
    Energy Control Systems Inc.
    5580 White Creek Rd.
    Mariette. Ml 48453
    Telephone* (517) 635-2359
    Contact John G Van
    Steenis
    Literature available Yes
    Fedders Solar Products Co
    Climatrol Division
    Edison. NJ 08817
    Telephone (201)549-7200
    Contact Mira Kostak
    Literature available Yes
    HHP Manufacturing Division
    Leigh Products Inc.
    610 SW 12th Ave
    Pompano Beach. FL 33060
    Telephone (305) 781-0830
    Contact H F Waser. C.E
    Smith
    Distnbution' CI S and export
    by 87 distributors
    Literature available Yes
    Fnednch Air Conditioning &
    Refrigerator! Co
    2007 Beechgrove
    Cltjca. NY 13501
    Telephone* (315) 724-7111
    Contact; Mike Linkiewicz
    Literature available: Yes
    GeoHeat Co
    RD 5
    PO Box 71
    Georgetown DE 19947
    Telephone (302)856-2091
    Contact Bill Bums
    Distribution. Local through
    one distributor
    GeoSolar Energy
    c/o Memtel Corp
    PO Box 2171
    Gaithersburg, MD 20760
    Telephone: (301)926-1891
    GeoSystems
    3623 N Park Dr
    Stillwater, OK 74074
    Telephone- (405) 372-6857
    Contact Jim Partin
    Hydron
    Water-to-air units
    Camot II Solar/Compression
    Furnace
    Water-to-water units
    Flonda Heat Pump
    Water-to-air units for
    commercial and residential
    use. Cooling—10.000 to
    240,000 Btu. heating—
    13.000 to 290,000 Btu.
    Geo-Thermal Heat Pumps
    Water-to-air units. Cooling
    capacity range of 15.100 to
    63.800 Btu. Heating
    capacity range of 15.800 to
    68.000 Btu.
    Geoheater III
    Residential water to-air units
    with cooling capacity range
    to 40.000 Btu. heating
    capacity range to 50.000
    Btu. Residential water-to-
    water units with heating
    capacity range of 40 to
    1,000 Btu.
    Develops closed loop, earth-
    coupled heat pump
    systems.
    Heat Controller Inc
    1900 Wellworth Ave.
    Jackson, Ml 49203
    Telephone (517)787 2100
    Contact ED Saylers
    Distnbution National
    Literature available Yes
    Heat Exchangers Inc
    8100 Monticello Ave
    Skokie. IL 60076
    Telephone- (312) 6790300
    Contact Dennis Devlin
    Distnbution G S & export
    Literature available- Yes
    Telephone: (612) 559-2711
    Contact R McKinley
    Literature available: Yes
    Marvair Co
    PO Box 400
    Cordele.GA 31015
    Telephone: (912) 273-3636
    Contact W B Johnston
    Distnbution: 24 southeast
    CIS distributors
    Literature available. Yes
    National GeoThermal
    1507 Buffalo Rd.
    PO Box 703
    Lawrenceburg, TN 38464
    Telephone: (615) 762-7106
    Contact: James J Tiedjens
    Distnbution: National
    Literature available: Yes
    Northrvip Inc
    302 Nichols Dr
    Hutchins. TX 75141
    Telephone (214) 225-7351
    Contact Harold Hammer.
    Chuck Harley
    Comfort-Aire and Century
    Water-to-air units for
    commercial and residential
    applications. Residential
    cooling range—21.000 to
    65.000 Btu. heating—
    29.500 to 78.000
    Commercial cooling—
    100.000 to 390.000.
    heating — 105.000 to
    410.000
    Koldwave
    Water to-air units for
    commercial and residential
    applications. Residential
    cooling range—7,000 to
    96.000 Btu. heaong—7,800
    to 11Z000 Commercial
    cooling—6.800 to 228,000,
    heating—8300 to 268.000
    Marvair and Cnspair
    Water-to-air heat pumps for
    commercial and residential
    applications Cooling
    capacity range—22.000 to
    41.000 Btu. heaong
    capacity range—25 000 to
    54 000
    Hydro- Solac
    Water to-air units for
    residential and commercial
    applicaoons. Cooling
    range—9,000 to 144.000
    Btu: heaong range—10,100
    to 174.000 Water-to-water
    units for commercial use
    only have cooling range of
    40,000 to 500.000 Btu:
    heaong—42.000 to 555.000
    En-Ex System
    Water to-air units for
    residenoal and commercial
    applicaoons Residenoal
    cooling—9.000 to 72.000
    Btu. heaong — 11 000 to
    100000 Commercial
    Lear Siegler Mammoth Div Sol-A-Terra
    13120-B County Rd 6
    Minneapolis, MN 55441
    37
    [3-2941
    

    -------
    Distribution. 175 worldwide
    distributors
    Literature available: Yes
    cooling—80,000 to 228,000;
    heating—94,000 to 248.000.
    Phoenix Enviro-Tech
    651 Vemon Way
    ~ Cajon. CA 92020
    Telephone (714)579-3883
    Contact; Robert L Watkins
    Distnbution (J S. & export
    Literature available Yes
    Phoenix Enviro-Temp
    Water-to-air units for
    residential and commercial
    applications Cooling—
    27300 to 76250. heating—
    33.000 to 95,000 Water-to-
    water units for residential
    and commercial
    applications Cooling —
    27.500 to 76250. heating—
    33.000 to 95.000.
    Pnme Energy Systems Ltd
    787 Alness St
    Downsview, Ontano
    Canada M3J 2H8
    Telephone- (416) 661-3303
    Dantherm
    The Singer Co
    Climate Control Div
    1300 Federal Blvd
    Carteret NJ 07008
    Telephone. (201) 636-3300
    Contact Robert P Shapess
    Singer Heat Pump
    Water to-air residential heat
    pump. Cooling range
    capacity— 14.000 to 47.000
    Btu. Heating range
    capacity— 18.000 to 58,000
    Btu.
    SolarCen Corporation
    1136 Wilmington Ave.
    Dayton, OH 45420
    Telephone- (513) 258-0808
    Contact Carl C Marx
    Literature available- Yes
    Solar and geothermal
    reservoir heating and
    cooling systems.
    Solar Onented
    Environmental Systems Inc.
    10639 Southwest 185th
    Terrace
    Miami. FL 33157
    Telephone: (305) 233-0711
    Contact Scott Balmer
    Power Saver Special
    Water-to-air units have
    cooling range of 11.000 to
    144.400 Btu. heating range
    of 17.848 to 243.614 Btu.
    Water-to-water units.
    Tempmaster Enterpnses
    Inc.
    1775 Central Flonda Pkwy
    Orlando, FL 32809
    Telephone: (305) 851 -9410
    Contact Ben Benner
    DistnbuOon 12 distnbutors
    in (J.S and Europe
    Literature available- Yes
    Tempmaster
    Water-to-air units for
    residential and commercial
    applications Residential
    cooling —13,000 to 72.000.
    heating—15,000 to 85.000.
    Commercial cooling—
    90.000 to 360.000.
    heating —104.000 to
    400.000 Water-to-water
    units for residential and
    commercial Residential
    cooling—13.000 to 72.000:
    heating — 15,000 to 85.000
    Commercial cooling—
    90.000 to 360.000.
    heating—104.000 to
    400000
    Thermal Energy Transfer I hi CO Geothermal Heat
    Corp.
    PO Box 397
    Powell. OH 43065
    Telephone (614) 889-6660
    Contact Hank Gregory
    Literature available: Yes
    Extractor
    Waterto-air unit Cooling
    range— 18.900 to 79.700
    Btu Heating range—
    43.350 to 55.250
    The T rane Co.
    Commercial Air
    Conditioning Div.
    LaCrosse. W! 54601
    Telephone (608) 787 3107
    Contact Richard Figgie
    Trane EnergyFit Heat
    Pumps
    Water-to-air units with
    cooling capacity range of
    6.800 to 39.000 Btu.
    Heating range of 10,000 to
    42.000
    Vanguard Energy Systems
    9133 Chesapeake Dr
    San Diego, CA 92123
    Telephone: (714) 292-1433
    Contact Gordon W. Fabian
    Distribution: (J.S.. Canada.
    England through 18
    distnbutors
    Literature available- Yes
    Vanguard Heat Pump
    Water to-air units for
    residential and commercial
    applications. Cooling—
    24,000 to 112000 Btu:
    heating—30.000 to 140.000
    Water-to-water units for
    residential and commercial
    applications. Cooling—
    24.000 to 64.000, heating—
    30.000 to 84.000
    Waterkotte Warmpumpen
    Gesellschaft mit
    beschrankter Haftung
    Horsthauser StraBe2
    4690 Heme 1
    West Germany
    Telephone: (49)
    02323/50543
    Literature available: Yes (in
    German)
    WeatherKing Inc.
    Addison Products Co.
    P O Box 20434
    Orlando. FL 32814
    Telephone (305) 894-2891
    Contact Jim Benjamin
    Literature available- Yes
    WeatherKing
    Water-to-air units with
    cooling capacity range of
    13.000 to 46.000 Btu.
    heating capacity range of
    29500 to 78.000 Btu.
    38
    [3-295]
    

    -------
    Wilcox Coot Heat Solar Inc.
    11203 49th St N
    Clearwater, Fl_ 33520
    Telephone- (813) 577-5154
    Contact CM. Wilcox
    Literature available Yes
    Wilcox Water Model Heat
    Pump
    Water-t&air unit with cooling
    capacity range of 14500 to
    45300 Btu: heating
    capacity range of 13.100
    39
    [3-2961
    

    -------
    Section 3.3
    Aquaculture Disposal Wells Supporting Data
    [3-297]
    

    -------
    SECTION 3.3.1
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (or SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    AUTHOR:
    (or INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION:
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES:
    Draft Report of Investigation
    Class V Injection Well Inspections,
    Oahu and Hawaii Islands, Hawaii
    Engineering Enterprises, Inc.
    November, 1985
    Marine Culture Enterprises
    Laie, Hawaii
    USEPA Region IX
    Aquaculture. The facility grows
    shrimp	under	controlled
    conditions.
    The following is a copy of the
    results of a well inspection
    conducted at this facility. The
    wells received water used in the
    aquaculture process. Severe
    clogging problems resulted and the
    wells were not in use at the time
    of the inspection.
    

    -------
    1 of 5 Pages
    UIC INSPECTION REPORT
    SECTION I - General Information
    Name of Facility: Marine Culture Enterprises
    Address: P.O. Box R
    Laie, HI 96762
    Telephone: (808) 293-2466
    Owner Address and Telephone (if different from above):
    Same
    Nature of Business: Aquaculture. The facility grows shrimp
    under controlled conditions.
    Use of Injection Well(s): Th« wells are not currently used.
    When they were in use they recieved water used in the
    aquaculture process.
    Permit # (or Permit Application #): U01315
    Injection Well(s) Location (Island, Tax Map Key, latitude,
    longitude, land marks, verbal description) :
    Latitude: 21° 42' 00' W Tax Map K£y 5:5-7-02:9
    Longitude: 157° 57' 45" N
    Type of Injection Well(s):
    Industrial
    Domesti c
    Drai naae
    Other	X
    Inj ection Well Currently Operating:	Yes	No	
    If No, Last Date Of Operation: February, 1985
    Future Plans to Operate: Yes	No x
    If Yes, Date:
    [3-2991
    

    -------
    2 of 5 Pages
    SECTION II - Hydro geologic Information.
    Well Completion Details (complete attached diagram)
    Subsurface Geology and Hydrology Data for Site:
    Corjil Aquifer
    Injection Formation Name: Pleistocene Coral Reef
    Attach the Following Information (note if unavailable) :
    1. Map of Facility Grounds:
    2. Well Logs(s) of Injection Well: NA
    3. As-built Diagram of Inj ection Well: NA
    4. Consultant Reports for Injection Well: NA
    5. Monitoring Data for Inj ection Well: NA
    6. Location and Data for Nearby Wells: There are three
    wells on-site which supply salt water for the
    aquaculture process. These wells are approximately
    1000 feet north of the injection wells.
    7. Monitoring Data for Nearby Wells: NA
    8. Status of Any Downgradient Water Supply Wells: NA
    9. Status of Any Nearby Surface Waters (possibly affected
    by well operations): This plant has an NPDES discharge
    permit and now uses a surface discharge to the ocean
    instead of using injection wells.
    [3-300]
    

    -------
    3 of 5 Pages
    SECTION III - Operating Data
    Injection Rate, Frequency, and Volume:
    The current discharge under the NPDES permit is 7000 gpn or
    10 mgd. However, when the wells were operating the plant
    was not at full capacity and discharge was only 1.2 - 3.5
    mgd.
    Description of Injection Operation (including brief history):
    The wells were constructed in August, 1984 and used until
    February, 19 85 . As the plant increased in capacity the
    wells began to clog and it became apparent that wells would
    not handle the discharge. A ditch to the sea was built and
    the plant now discharges under an NPDES permit. The wells
    serve as an emergency backup.
    Surface Facilities/Treatment Process: None
    Wastewater Sources:
    Salt water effluent from aquaculture project.
    Generalized Waste Category(ies)/Composition:
    Salt water with added nutrients. Effluent contains
    nitrates, nitrites, annoxia, high BOD, and or thophosphate.
    The pH is approximately 7.5.
    [3-301}
    

    -------
    4 of 5 Pages
    Visual Appearance of Well:
    The wells are located approximately 10 feet from the canal
    which is used to take effluent from the growing tanks.
    There is a large screened intake in the center of the canal
    which is plumbed into the wells. The wells are 24" PVC
    casing set in a 30" diameter hole. The casing is flush with
    the ground and is covered with a 30" diameter steel plate
    with a vent pipe. Effluent enters the well approximately 4
    feet below ground.
    Method of Disposal (transport to well):
    Effluent is transported to the well intake structure by a
    canal. The intake is connected to the well by an
    underground PVC pipeline. Flow is by gravity only.
    Previous Problems with Well: Yes X	No
    (e.g. clogging, overflowing, excessive suction, etc.)
    If yes, describe:
    The wells have experienced severe clogging problems. This
    is probably the result of a combination of suspended solids
    and bacteriological growth.
    Attach the following (note if unavailable) :
    1. All Analyses of Wastewater: NA
    2. All Operating Records: NA
    [3-302}
    

    -------
    5 of 5 Pages
    SECTION IV - Inspection Specifics
    Name and Affiliation of Inspectors: Lorraine Council, EEI
    David Shepard, EEI
    William Bohrer -
    EPA Region IX
    Name and Affiliation of Facility Contact: Bill Salser
    Vice President
    Marine Culture
    Enterprises
    Date: 8/5/85	Time: i«^n nm	,	.
    Reason for Inspect! on: 7^.	fs	^ naficnvicb. m^Tar^ 3rcA
    of iA.	-lypts of CfoX i'njecht>^ i*W/s, This
    ,mpl<
    -------
    
    Cor6 hnsd>°* i
    (CCD
    "jf sJ¦ 3 My u^ -c f/s
    Eli
    iJl
    ft., nisi
    Total Daptfe
    £0
    .ft.
    Hala Dlaatatar.
    3&
    la.
    Caalnat
    Matarlal
    Langth.
    ~Parf arata*
    ~Saraaa
    P'/C
    Olamatar.
    Wall
    J5L
    
    .ft.
    .la.
    .la.
    Opanla«a £V±laf. ia^L.P.
    ft., mal
    ».•
    r . '
    ¦ t
    P
    jSfc
    (To
    ®°&,
    oO
    #•-
    »o1
    o • *
    $
    rh
    •°3
    V&,
    «•
    • a-
    .~*. •
    .0*
    •••
    r°°
    0*(
    ~ <*
    0*o
    o«
    i
    •0,
    0
    I-
    K
    M
    •oC
    H
    Caaiaat Qroat
    Laagtli / 9
    .ft.
    -8alld Caalng:
    Matarlal.
    Laaatfc ^ O
    
    .ft.
    Olamatar IP in.
    Wall
    Thlckaaaa > ">«o
    In.
    Laagtfc.
    £ £?
    Rack Slza.
    -ft.
    ¦In.
    Opaa Hola:
    La wot a	f
    Dlamatar
    .ft.
    J a.
    NOTES:
    1.	For existing wells, provide actual elevation section.
    2.	Include additional casing, grout seal, liner tubes, sump, etc.
    if applicable.
    3.	If design of well differs substantially, provide section showing
    actual construction.
    [3-304] -
    

    -------
    )l * "v v
    

    -------
    ^ C;
    

    -------
    SECTION 4
    Domestic Wastewater Disposal Wells
    [4-1]
    

    -------
    Section 4.1
    Raw Sewage Waste Disposal Wells and Cesspools
    Supporting Data
    [4-2]
    

    -------
    SECTION 4.1.1
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (or SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    AUTHOR:
    {or INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:
    STUDY AREA:
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES:
    From An Assessment of Class V
    Underground Injection in Illinois,
    Interim Report. Phase One:
    Assessment of Current Class V
    Activities in Illinois
    S.L. Burch and B.R. Hensel,
    Illinois State Water Survey
    Division, Illinois State Geological
    Society
    July, 1986
    Illinois, USEPA Region V
    Not applicable
    Included for review are brief
    discussions of local geology
    associated with disposal of raw
    sewage into abandoned coal mines.
    A regional map and regional cross
    section are included.
    [4-31
    

    -------
    Streator, Southern LaSalle County, Population 15,000.
    The City of Streator is located north and east of the Vermilion River
    (fig. 18) on upland deposits of the Yorkville Till Member of the Wedron
    Formation. The till may be overlain by five to ten feet of loess. Some
    sand and gravel deposits are present in the till, however they are not
    extensive. The uppermost bedrock is shale, sandstone, and several coals
    of the Pennsylvaman age Carbondale Formation (fig. 19). The Herrin No.
    6 Coal has been mined out beneath much of the city. A second, deeper
    coal, the Rock Island No. 2 Coal, was also mined in the Streator vicinit-
    y. Portions of the bedrock, including the Herrin Coal are exposed along
    the valley wall of the Vermilion River. The coal seams are bounded above
    and below by geologic materials which have a very low hydraulic
    conductivity. They may, however, be interconnected at random by test
    holes. Consequently, contamination of a locally important Pennsylvaman
    sandstone is possible. Together, the Pennsyl vaman units are approxi-
    mately 200 feet thick." They overlie other water-bearing formations of
    Ordovician age limestone and sandstone (St. Peter) which are of regional
    importance (fig. 20). Ground water from these units is utilized by local
    industries.
    There are hundreds and perhaps more than a thousand Class V injection
    wells in the Streator area. Drop shafts to the roof rock of the abandon-
    ed Herrin No. 6 coal mine are commonplace. No pressure is used when
    injecting: the fluids simply fall to the mine (the injection zone) under
    the influence of gravity. Because the City draws its public water
    supplies from the Vermilion River upstream of where the mine opening
    discharge occurs, there is no immediate threat to the residents using
    this public water supply. However, there are water wells finished in the
    drift, in the sandstone just below the Herrin No. 6 Coal, or in the
    deeper Ordovician and Cambrian aquifers. Although there is no pressure
    buildup, there is still some potential for leakage from the coal mine and
    that may adversely affect some of these water wells.
    Carrier Mills, Southwest Saline County, Population 2200.
    The Town of Carrier Mills is located in the unglaciated portion of
    southern Illinois. The unconsolidated surfacial deposits consist of up
    to 15 feet of loess over a thin layer of lacustrine silt and clay of the
    [4-4]
    

    -------
    D1A®T
    FOR REVIEW ONLY
    Figure 18. Location map of the Streator area, LaSalle County.
    [4-5]
    

    -------
    DRAFT
    FOR REVIEW ONLY
    Livingston Co.
    S T30N R3E
    Sec
    13 12 1 36
    La Salle Co.
    T31N R3E
    25 24 13
    N NW	T31N. R3E
    12 I Elev. ! 7'na 17 116 1211 22 I 23 I 24
    (ft aoove
    sea level)
    650
    T31N,
    R4E E
    I 30 :
    \/»m)ntnr
    nive-
    t- 600 J
    uaiena
    Gawna-Pianevtiie
    1 Soil rone
    " Till
    ! Sana and Gravel
    i	J Sand
    HZ3 Gravel
    ¦¦Coal
    I Shale
    ; Pennsvlvanian (undifferentiated)
    : Dolomite
    Figure 19. Cross-section through Streator area illustrating coal seams.
    Approximate orientations of cross-sections are indicated.
    [4-6]
    

    -------
    sw
    Chenoa
    McLean Co
    Illinois School
    Slreator,
    lot Boys
    LaSalle Co
    Ottawa,
    La Salle Co
    LaSatlc Co
    Pleistocene
    Pennsylvaman
    Si'onart Dotomsle _
    
    Onoola Dotomtte
    can Ctniie
    Ml &mon Sancfclooo
    0	I 2 3 4 5 ml
    	1	«	u _j	i .J
    Figure 20. Regional cross-section through LaSalle County based on deep
    drilling logs. Illustrates stratigraphic relationships of
    deeper sandstones to the Pennsylvanian age strata (from
    Willman and Payne, 1942).
    

    -------
    fo^aft
    Carmi Member of the Equality Formation. The bedrock (Pennsylvania^Y1^^ ONLY
    Carbondale Formation) consists of heavily faulted beds of shale with
    lesser amounts of sandstone, limestone, siltstone, coal and clay. The
    Springfield No. 5 Coal has been extensively mined out beneath the city.
    Surface mining has also been practiced in some local areas.
    There are 47 known Class V injection wells in Carrier Mills. All of
    these wells, according to the Class V inventory, are believed to be
    disposing of domestic sewage into abandoned coal mine seams approximately
    75 to 100 feet deep. No records of active water wells are on file with
    the ISWS, however some dug wells are likely to exist in the rural areas.
    If any drilled wells are finished in sandstone or fractured shales (50 to
    130 feet below ground surface), they may be susceptible to potential
    leakage from the coal mine. Leakage may occur through or along poorly
    sealed borings, fractures, and fault zones. Because the community relies
    on surface water supplies some distance away, it is unlikely that public
    drinking water supplies will be contaminated.
    Herrin, Northwest Williamson County, Population 11,000.
    The City of Herrin overlies glacial deposits of the Vandalia Till
    Member of the Glasford Formation. This clay rich till is 20 to 75 feet
    thick. Underlying the till is Pennsylvaman age bedrock of the Modesto
    and Carbondale Formations. The bedrock consists primarily of shale, with
    lesser amounts of sandstone, limestone, coal, and clay. The area is
    heavily faulted. Much of the city has been undermined, especially to the
    north and west.
    There are 10 Class V injection wells at Herrin, according to the
    inventory, which inject domestic sewage into the abandoned Herrin No. 6
    Coal mine. All of these wells are approximately 90 feet deep. No water
    wells are known to operate ¦within the city which utilizes surface water
    supplies. The absence of any -significant ground-water resource near the
    abandoned mine makes the contamination potential due to Class V injection
    at Herrin unlikely.
    [4-3]
    

    -------
    SECTION 4.1.2
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (or SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    AUTHOR:
    (or INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:
    STUDY AREA:
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES:
    Contamination of Underground Water
    in the Bellevue Area
    Ground-Water Geology Section
    Ohio Division of Water
    June, 1961
    Bellevue,
    Counties,
    Sandusky, and Erie
    Ohio, USEPA Region V
    in
    the
    Not applicable
    Investigations were conducted
    the Bellevue area to determine
    extent of underground water
    contamination resulting from the
    use of sewage disposal wells.
    Field investigations, chemical
    analyses,	bacteriological
    analyses, well log analyses, and
    all area complaints were studied.
    Results of the study indicated
    that (1) a large portion of a
    potential industrial aquifer had
    been rendered unusable; (2)
    contamination of the water source
    can be directly attributed to
    underground sewage disposal from
    Eellevue; (3) continued dumping of
    the contaminants would worsen the
    situation. Also discussed are
    effects of
    contaminants.
    the
    some potential
    [4-9]
    

    -------
    CONTAMINATION OF
    UNDERGROUND WATER
    in the
    BELLEVUE AREA
    A Report Prepared For The
    OHIO WATER COMMISSION
    "by the
    GROUND-WATER GEOLOGY SECTION
    OHIO DIVISION OF WATER
    Columbus, Ohio
    Jane 1961
    (Reprinted January 19^3)
    [4-10]
    

    -------
    CONTENTS
    Page
    I.	Introduction 		1
    II.	Background		3
    III.	Present Study		9
    IV.	Summary and Conclusions 		21
    V.	Appendix		2U
    VI.	Bibliography		28
    TABLES
    Page
    Table 1. Summary of Ground-Water Analyses in Erie,
    Sandusky, and Huron Counties 	 15
    Table 2. Analytical Results of 1961 Ground-Water
    Sampling in the Sellevue Area	 l6
    Table 3* Results of Chemical Analyses of Multiple
    Water Samples	 18
    Table 4. Chemical Analyses of Ground Water in the
    Bellevue Area, 1961 Survey 	 19-20
    ILLUSTRATIONS
    Page
    Block Diagram, shoving ground-water contamination
    in the Bellevue area 	 Frontispiece
    Industries and public buildings dispose of sewage
    in Bellevue 	 k
    Redrilling a clogged household disposal well 	 6
    Redrilling a city storm-drainage well	 7
    Map of the Bellevue area, showing locations of
    contaminated wells and disposal wells 	 10
    New homes, north of Bellevue, with inadequate water
    supplies	 11
    [4-111
    

    -------
    ro
    jfj"" CONTAMINATED WELL
    |j|" SEWAGE DISPOSAL WELL
    T-*- : LIMESTONE
    BLOCK DIAGRAM, SHOWING GROUND-WATER CONTAMINATION IN THE BELLEVUE AREA.
    

    -------
    I. INTRODUCTION
    A report, presented to the Ohio Water Commission in October i960,
    pointed oat that contamination is introduced in the Bellevue area through
    veils drilled for sewage disposal. Mention was Bade of 8U sewage disposal
    veils drilled vithin the city in the past seven years; contaminated water
    wells north of Bellevue in Sandusky and Erie Counties; and, the extremely
    porous nature of the limestone aquifer which permits contamination to
    spread over vide areas. This was based largely upon logs of disposal veils
    drilled for individuals and housing developments.
    At that time, members of the Water Commission suggested that a
    more complete investigation be made of the Bellevue area for the purpose of
    determining the extent of underground-water contamination.
    During the first four months of 1961, field investigations were
    made by Alfred C. Walker, James J. Schmidt, Henry L. Pree, and Russell B.
    Stein, geologists of the Ohio Division of Water. Donald Day, Assistant
    Sanitary Engineer, Ohio Department of Health, assisted in collecting water
    samples for analysis. Chemical analyses of water samples were made by the
    staff of the U.S. Geological Survey Quality of Water Laboratory, Columbus,
    and bacteriological analyses by the Ohio Department of Health laboratory.
    Additional analyses were supplied by personnel in the health offices of
    Erie and Sandusky Counties.
    During the course of thlB study, all available well logs and
    water analyses were collected and studied; water well drillers and well
    owners were interviewed; old records were studied; and, »n complaints
    were investigated. Mrs. tydia Rickerds, R.N., Bellevue; George A. Hall,
    Ohio Water Pollution Control Board; Professor George Hanna, Water
    Resources Center, O.S.U.; Bruce McDlU, Ohio Department of Health;
    [4--WQ.
    

    -------
    George Whetstone, U.S. Geological Survey, and many others, including
    residents of the Bellevue area, offered helpful advice.
    A more complete study of this problem might take several years and
    involve test drilling and continuous sampling. However, ve feel that the
    results of this four-month study show that:
    (1)	A large portion of a potential industrial aquifer has been
    rendered unuseable.
    (2)	Contamination of this water source can be directly attributed
    to underground sewage disposal from Bellevue. -
    (3)	Continued dumping of contaminants will worsen this already
    deplorable situation.
    Disposing of sewage and other wastes underground Is much like
    sweeping dirt under the rug. It's out of sight, but it'B still there.
    There is little difference between waste disposal into a ground-
    water mass and waste disposal into a surface water mass. Although it may be
    temporarily out of sight, contamination of ground water is far more serious
    than similar contamination of surface waters. Underground water moves so
    8lowly that years may pass before the contamination is detected. Once it
    has occurred, It may require many more years before the water is again free
    from contamination.
    -2-
    [4-14
    

    -------
    II. BACKGROUND
    liF-the. city-of Bellevue (population 8286), practically every dwell-
    ing and industrial plant is provided with a well for the purpose of disposing
    of sewage.
    Veils ranging"frem 35 feet to 270 feet Seep discharge toilet flush-
    Inge, restaurant and laundry washings, kitchen sink garbage, bath water*
    mortuary and hospital refuse, etc., into the limestone beneath this area.
    There are more than lltOQ privately owned sewage disposal wells, or
    sinkholes> within the. city and more than 200 municipally operated disposal
    wells, all using the porous limestone bedrock as a sewerT This system con-
    prises what Is probably the most concentrated area of underground sewage
    disposal J&, Prtfrfcrfl -States.-
    Contaminated water wells have been reported in the Bellevue area
    for over UO years. However,.,'clty7we33Liyy:vfiJ:ch.were tue&zto- supplement the.
    surface water supply, were apparently unaffected until 19I&-
    A brief resume of the history of Bellevue's water supply is given
    below.
    1872 Water supply system established for the city. Surface source.
    1919 A report on proposed improvements of the public water supply
    states, "The disposal of sewage is effected in a very unusual
    manner without the use of sewers; by discharging the sewage
    into so-called sinkholes or drilled wells penetrating the
    open limestone formations underlying this locality. This
    method of sewage disposal is quite generally practiced
    throughout the city and results in rendering drilled wells
    unsafe sources of water supply."
    -3-
    [4-1
    

    -------
    industries «„*" —
    Und"-8rouMMd W»Uc
    f4-13
    

    -------
    1932 Water veil drilled as an auxiliary water source.
    1937 Four Btorage reservoirs are insufficient to Berve the city.
    Wells drilled to supplement them.
    Engineer's report states that during the (1937) flood,
    ".... a large number of sinkholes containing sewage
    overflowed and the area immediately surrounding, and for
    miles north, was polluted with sewage. Analyses of well
    and cistern water in this area showed a large percentage
    to he contaminated."
    19*»1 Two additional wella drilled to supplement city water supply.
    These wells were reported to yield a combined supply of
    1050 gallons per minute from depths of around. 200 feet.
    Water from, y,sll~ eet- deep) at. France quarry was
    found-torberuouttvnln&ted';;V-IThfo well was located 0.2 mile
    west of the city limits and produced 300 gpm.
    19^5 New city well drilled at water works.
    Total depth: 137 feet. Yield: 500 gpm. Total hardness: UoQ ppm.
    19^ City water wells show contamination.
    ier day ground-^
    water suppljr for soy^yn prw^na^ ng pTnjVtflue toy
    coDtamiDated>water o'b.ta^he^J.at dep,th of 230 feet 7 /
    19^5 City plans to abandon wells.
    Flans being considered to Install adequate sewerage
    and drainage facilities.
    19^6 Soybean plant opens using city water and 230-foot sewage
    disposal well. Additional upground reservoir built by city.
    City "veils..abandoned..' All InduBtrlal-wella ln the - city
    abandoned.^
    - ^ _-f„ ¦»»»¦
    -5-
    [4-T7
    

    -------
    I9U7 Plans for sewerage abandoned due to excessive cost.
    I95U Water supply capacity enlarged to h million gallons per day.
    jyyStet?Local well drillers reported that, in time, those old
    wells "became completely plugged with sewage and it was necessary to redrill
    them to remove the "sewage plug" so they would again permit free flow into
    the limestone. With the increased use of detergents for household use,
    plugging is reportedly no longer a major problem, although it still occurs.
    Household sewage has clogged this disposal well. Re-drilling will
    again permit free flow into the underlying limestone formations.
    of sewage dis-posal consists of a septic tank J
    •iiwailStTBH^TW^e efTV&snl PraTW'tlffirTlovlnrinto a disposal well. t
    Although a portion of the suspended matter has settled out, the remaining
    suspended matter and matter in solution is still present in septic tank
    effluent. It was not determined what means is used to dispose of the sludge
    from these septic tanks.
    

    -------
    mmmz
    Buckeye Street, Bellevue
    A city storm drainage disposal well has "become clogged and
    is being re-drilled.
    -7-
    [4-19-]
    

    -------
    Although the Bellevue system of sewage disposal Is a vestige of
    the 19th century, It 1b not unique in the United States. Nearly the entire
    State of Florida Is underlain "by limestone, which provides large supplies
    of ground water. Since the turn of the century, drainage veils have been
    drilled for waste disposal into limestone aquifers. This has resulted in
    continual contamination of ground-water supplies in many areas. In 1913i
    aa ect vas passed by the Florida legislature to prohibit pollution of Bur-
    face and ground waters. Although this law provided criminal penalties for
    its violation, it had no provisions for injunctive enforcement. This
    loophole was remedied by an amendment in 1955 which has proven helpful to
    the State Board of Health in its work of underground-water pollution control.
    (See appendix.) Last year the city of Live Oak, one of Florida's vorst
    offenders for 56 years, completed an adequate sewage disposal system and
    has abandoned the use of disposal wells.
    -8-
    [4-Zc
    

    -------
    III. PRESENT STUDY
    When the Investigation was started, It vas assumed that contami-
    nation Introduced through disposal veils in Bellevue was compounded toy
    additional disposal veils beyond the city limits. Field investigations
    have since shown this to he untrue. Very few disposal veils are in opera-
    tion outside of the city.
    A survey of 52 homes in Oroton Township, Erie County, revealed
    that only one home uses a veil, or sinkhole, for sewage disposal. Numerous
    disposal veils reported in Lyme Township, Huron County, were all found to
    he located within the city limits. None are known to exist elsewhere in
    this township. Wells and natural sinkholes were formerly used west of
    Bellevue in York Township, Sandusky County. In recent years, however,
    these have been replaced by septic tanks and leaching tile fields under the
    direction of the Sandusky County health authorities. Thus, with very few
    exceptions, the only direct underground contamination in the entire area
    is from Bellevue proper. The locations of disposal wells determined by
    thiB survey are shown on page 10.
    Probably the gosVte'rtoqs drager associated. with domestic sewage
    is thepossibl® presence of pathogenic micro-organisms.' Recent studies of;
    domestic sewage b&v* shown viruses to be another danger. Professor W. L.
    Mailman, Michigan State University ^ has indicated that viruses can travel
    ^.Aw*1--*-'- 			 	
    . treaty distances'- -in; grroaiJM«f£eir gnii tn«ii "¦
    them,
    This same study shows that in granular materials, such assand- •
    *	»•«<•	¦>!!.¦¦	>3 V . ,-I- rt	J	-**	»
    stone, bacteria vill travel only a few feet from the point of entry. ^
    However, in limestone aquifers, where free movement Is not restricted, the
    

    -------
    
    Sandusky
    ERIE COUNTY
    —SANDUSKY COUNTY^
    MA R _G_A R E TT A
    ! "~i *
    I Castalio I
    !
    TOWNSEND
    r
    
    II
    1
    GROT
    • O
    jp/
    N,f
    • 9
    •••
    . "• *	./V M E
    ,V* 'A
    ¦ /
    I /
    •. Billevue \\ '
    '
    
    -------
    
    ¦t ravel .ofTacterl%JL»' limltTsdToftiy "by the extent of the water-bearing, JoSitJ
    ^In most aquifers, particularly in lime-
    stone aquifers, the horizontal permeability is much greater than the
    vertical permeability.
    A major difficulty in this study has been in obtaining samples of
    water from contaminated, or reportedly contaminated, wells. It is a common
    practice for well drillers or homeowners to abandon and plug a water well
    that is found, or suspected, to be unsafe. ThasyjfiTMaifc instances where j
    theTTLocai healtK'district ^ias a'record of an unsafe water well, our field
    _ unable to collect additional- samples for further
    - a-, l '-<•
    ¦ —.TV.— **
    s'Kave'^en!" relayed to us during this investigation of
    ' 		r			,,
    wells which ylelded-eaeily reeognizable raw sewage (including toilet tissue)
    while-being-drilled. Other's have foamed because of high detergent content,
    
    andr _aiiiIH5tKr s ]^fie contents of which.are„best,ieft to the reader's
    to say, these wells had all been immediately plugged
    and abandoned, so our investigators have no first-hand information.
    
    These new homes, north of Bellevue, have no water wells because of
    ground-water contamination. Water is hauled in by tank truck to
    supplement inadequate cistern supplies.
    -11-
    [4-2;
    

    -------
    Because of the poor quality of the ground vater available north
    of Bellevue, many homeowners and builders have made no attempt to develop
    veil supplies. A number of new homes built in southwestern Groton
    Township, Erie County, use cisterns for their household vater supplies.
    When adequate supplies are not available from rainwater, vater is hauled
    from Bellevue. Although twenty years ago, yields of a6 much as 500 gal-
    lons per minute vere obtained from veils in the underlying limestones,
    today homes must rely upon inadequate cistern supplies. Similar quanti-
    ties can still be expected, but the quality is too poor for use.
    In northern Groton Township, shallow veils are apparently
    unaffected by contamination and they are commonly UBed as sources of
    domestic vater supply. Many of the homeowners, however, chlorinate their
    water supplies before using, "JuBt to be safe." Deep wells (greater than
    60 feet) are reported to produce water of poor quality.
    The northern part of Margaretta Township, Erie County, is
    served by vater piped from the Sandusky vater plant because of "inadequate"
    veil supplies in this area. Records of veils on file at the Division of
    Vater indicate thiB to be a quality inadequacy, rather than insufficient
    quantity.
    A number of veils in York Township, Sandusky County, have been
    found unsafe pnd are now chlorinated before being used, although chlorina-
    tion as a "cure-all" for sewage-contaminated veils is questionable.
    A brief discussion of some chemical constituents, vhich are
    possible sewage indicators, follows.
    -12-
    [4-2
    

    -------
    In pure form ammonia 1b a colorless gas. In ground waters it
    generally results from the decomposition of nitrogenous organic matter.
    If present in ground waters in appreciable amounts (0.2 ppa), it provides
    strong presumptive evidence of the presence of 6ewage or sewage effluent,
    especially if there is also a rise in the chloride content. The Royal
    Commission on Sewage Disposal (Gt. Britain) stated In the 6th annual
    report that, "the most delicate chemical index of recent sewage pollution
    in water is the increase in the figure for ammoniacal nitrogen."
    An interesting sidelight 1b the fact that water with traces of
    ammoniacal nitrogen has a high chlorine demand and requires much longer
    contact periods for satisfactory sterilization.
    No limits have teen set by the USPHS Drinking Water Standards
    for ammonia, but in 1930 Swiss standards for drinking water gave maximum
    content of free ammonia as 0.02 ppm.
    Although free ammonia is often of vegetable or mineral origin
    and without hygienic significance, its concentration in excess of 0.10 ppm
    renders the water suspect of recent pollution.
    "Nitrites \
    *—ini i
    In water, nitrites are generally formed by the action of bac-
    teria upon ammonia and organic nitrogen. Owing to the fact that they are
    quickly oxidized to nitrates, they are seldom present in water in signif-
    icant concentrations. In conjunction with ammonia and nitrate, nitrites
    in water are often indicative of pollution.
    No standards have been set for nitrite in drinking water. A
    -13-
    

    -------
    generally accepted limit In domestic water supplies is 2.0 ppm.
    Nitrates are the end product of aerobic stabilization of organic
    nitrogen, and as such they occur In polluted waters that have undergone
    self-purification. In a few instances, nitrates may be added to underground
    water by natural weathering processes involving nitrate salts.
    Infant methemoglobinemia, a disease characterized by certain
    specific blood changes and cyanosis, may be caused by high nitrate concen-
    trations in water. Reported as nitrates, concentrations of 20 ppm and
    70 ppm have caused serious cyanosis in children.
    Do drinking water standards were set in the 19^6 USFHS standards.
    However, the recommended standards of i960 contain the following statement
    concerning nitrate:
    "High nitrate content in private wells has been reported to cause
    methemoglobinemia in infants, but public supplies have not been involved.
    Although precise limits have not been established, it is generally agreed
    that water containing more than 10-20 ppm of nitrate as nitrogen should
    not be used to feed infants. The committee believes, therefore, that a
    recommended limit of 10 ppm nitrate nitrogen should be set. If the nitrate
    content of the water exceeds the recommended limit, the public and the
    medical prdfeesion should be informed."
    The process of nitrification is also reversible. When the
    dissolved oxygen content of a water falls to zero, nitrates may supply the
    combined oxygen to bacteria and be reduced in the process.
    N03	> N02 —> NO 	> N 	> NH2—> NH3
    -lU-
    [4-26"
    

    -------
    This process occurs in ground water when the dissolved oxygen is
    depleted either toy bacterial action or chemical decomposition. Anaerobic
    bacteria could utilize tje combined oxygen in nitrate and initiate the
    process.
    dispensing, and emulsifying agents. They do not form insoluble compounds
    with calcium and magnesium ionB in water and are generally preferred to
    soap which forms insoluble compounds with these ions. More than 75$ of
    synthetic detergents in household use are the anionic type, alkyl benzene
    sulfonate (ABS).
    are becoming more common, standards have been proposed. The recommended
    limit of 0.5 ppm as ABS was set on the basis that beyond this limit water
    so contaminated may exhibit foaming. Actually, the presence of any ABS
    in ground water above 0.1 ppm is indicative of pollution.
    Prior to the water quality survey of ground water in the vicinity
    of Bellevue, nine ground water samples had been collected in Erie, Sandusky,
    and Huron Counties in connection with other projects. A brief summary of
    these analyses is given in the following table:
    Anionic Detergent-
    Detergents contain surface-active agents along with wetting,
    Because reports of contamination of water supplies by detergents
    Table 1
    Chemical constituents In ppm
    Max.	Min. Median
    Dissolved solids
    1,560 38
    Total hardness
    2,500
    370
    Nitrate (NO3)
    Chloride (Cl)
    596
    7.0
    6.8
    0.0
    12
    0.1
    -15-
    

    -------
    Determinations of ammonia nitrogen and nitrite nitrogen were not
    made in connection with these 8tudies.
    During February, March and April 1961, a series	of ground water
    samples were collected in the vicinity of Bellevue, Ohio.	Thirty-two samples
    were collected and the pertinent analytical results are given in table 2.
    Table 2
    February - April 1961 Survey
    Chemical constituents, in ppm
    Max. Mln.	Median
    Dissolved solids 1,000 150	1*30
    Ammonia as NH^ 2.7 0.0	0.1
    Nitrite (H02) 12 0.0	0.5
    Nitrate (NO3) 158 0.5	25
    Chloride (Cl) lh6 5-0
    ABS 0.7 0.0	0.1
    Of the 32 samples collected in the vicinity of Bellevue, 27
    contained ammonia. Nine of the samples contained more than 0.3 ppm of
    ammonia. Approximately one-half of the samples analyzed contained
    detectable amounts of nitrite nitrogen.
    All samples contained nitrate. The maximum amount in ground
    water in Bellevue, 158 ppm, was found in the Thomas well. This well con-
    tained 0.3 ABS and 0.1 ppm ammonia.
    Alley! benzene sulfonate (ABS) was detected in 22 of the 32
    samples collected in the study area. The highest concentration observed
    was in a sample from the Lyons well, 0.7 ppm. Phosphates are present in
    all well waters. The highest phosphate concentrations were generally
    -16-
    [4-2.
    

    -------
    associated with the samples with the highest ABS concentrations. This is
    to be expected since phosphates are generally used as ""builders" in com-
    mercial synthetic detergents.
    There was no correlation between chlorides and nitrates in the
    study area. The sample with the highest nitrate (Thomas well) contained
    36 ppm of chloride. The highest observed chloride (lU6 ppm) was associated
    with a sample (Bunting well) containing one of the highest ammonia
    (0.6 ppm as NHij.) concentrations. However, this Eample contained only
    1.3 ppm of nitrate and 0.15 ppm of nitrite.
    Samples collected in Bellevue during February 1961 contain nitrate
    concentrations which range from 0.6 ppm and 38 ppm- The samples were
    collected during an extended period of below freezing temperatures. During
    this period the ground water reservoir was at least partially cut off from
    surface water recharge. IXiring March the range in nitrate was 0.5 ppm to
    77 ppm. Although the weather was cold during the time the samples were
    collected in March, the period between sampling runs was above freezing most
    of the time. Three of the four low nitrate samples (Weilnau, Close, and
    Beechler) contained traces of hydrogen sulfide indicating that there was a
    reducing environment in the ground water at that time and no doubt the low
    nitrate content of these samples can be attributed to the reduction of the
    nitrate and subsequent escape of ammonia.
    Six samples were collected in April at points where samples had
    been collected either daring March or February.
    Table 3 lists the results of chemical analyses of water from wells
    where samples had been collected on two or more occasions during the survey.
    -17-
    [4—2<
    

    -------
    Table 3
    ppm
    Ammonia
    
    ABS
    as
    no2
    NO-
    Weiland 2-6-61
    0.1
    0.1
    0.5
    29
    4-18-61
    0.1
    0.2
    0.05
    52
    Thomas 3-7-61
    0.1
    0.2
    0.00
    92
    4-18-61
    0-3
    0.1
    .00
    00
    Neill 3-7-61
    0.1
    0.2
    1.0
    4l
    4-18-61
    0.1
    0.1
    .05
    38
    Andrews 2-6-61
    0.1
    0.2
    1.5
    26
    4-18-61
    0.2
    0.2
    .00
    36
    Adams 3-5-61
    0.2
    0.1
    0.05
    77
    4-18-61
    0.2
    0.3
    0.20
    91
    In every well but one, there was an Increase In the nitrate
    content of the vater after the end of the cold weather in February or March.
    The Nelll well did not change appreciably between early March and the middle
    of April.
    In summary, the underground water in the vicinity of Bellevue,
    Ohio, contains higher concentrations of nitrogen compounds than water from
    other underground reservoirs in Erie and adjacent counties. A significant
    number of samples (70$) contained alkyl benzene sulfonate and about 85$
    contained ammonia nitrogen. Since alkyl benzene sulfonate is not a
    naturally occurring compound, it is safe to say that there is a significant
    amount of pollution in the underground water in the Bellevue area.
    -18-
    [4-3C
    

    -------
    Table U
    Chemical Analyses of Ground Water in the Bellevue Area
    Ammonia as	Nitrite Nitrate Phosphorus as
    NUlj.	ABS	N02	NO3	PO^
    F. C. Adams
    (Bragg Rd.) #1	0.1	0.2	. 05 77-	.20
    #2	0.3	0.2	.20 91.	.50
    Mr. Adams
    (Potter Rd.)	0.2	0.0	.00	.7	.2U
    Walter Andrews
    (Knauss Rd.) #1	0.2	0.1	1.5	26.	.10
    #2 0.2 0.2	.00 36.	1.0
    Mr. Beechler
    (MefJill Rd.)	0.1	0.0	.00 5.3	.15
    Wayne Bunting
    (Billings Rd.)#1 0.1	0.1	1.0	2.7	-10
    #2 0.1	0.1	.10 15.	.70
    #3 0.6	0.1	.15 1.3	-50
    Dale Close
    (Smith Rd.)	0.0	0.0	. 00	.U	.15
    D. D. Crouch
    (Route 99)	0.0	0.0	.00	8.0	.20
    L. H. Danklefeen
    (Billings Rd.)	0.1	0.1	.UO 17.	.20
    Mrs. DeCaro
    (Route 269)	0.2	0.0	.10	6.5	.20
    H. N. Farmer
    (Portland Rd.) 0.2	0.0	.00	.6	.20
    i
    «
    Wo, Gibbs
    (MaGill Rd.)	2.7	0.6	12.	38.	1.0
    M. Lyons
    (MaGill Rd.)	0.0	0.7	.05 30.	.10
    L. Markle
    (Potter Rd.)	0.3	0.1	.00 29.	.10
    -19-
    [4-31
    

    -------
    Table 4 (continued)
    Chemical Analyses of Ground Water in the Bellevue Area
    Ammonia as
    NHii	ABS
    Witrite Nitrate Phosphorus as
    N02	WO3	PO4
    Earl McKinney
    (MaGill Rd.)
    Robert Moore
    (MaGill Rd.)
    Donald Moyer
    (Knauss Rd.)
    0.6
    0.0
    0.7
    Swaze Neill
    (Billings Rd.) #1 0.2
    #2 0.1
    Mrs. Sanders
    (Maple Rd.)	0.1
    Sand Bill Comm.
    (Route U)	0.6
    J. Stickradt
    (Route U)	0.1
    R. W. Thomas
    (Portland Rd.) #1 0.2
    #2 0.1
    Veiland Bros.
    (Bragg Rd.) #1 0.1
    #2 0.2
    Kenneth Weilnau
    (Portland Rd.)	1.0
    Mr. Williams'
    (MaGill Rd.)	OA
    L. F. Wright
    (MaGill Rd.)	0.0
    0.6
    O.k
    0.1
    0.1
    0.1
    0.1
    0.0
    0.0
    0.1
    0.3
    0.1
    0.1
    0.0
    0.1
    0.1
    .00
    .90
    .30
    1.0
    .05
    .00
    .00
    .50
    .05
    A5
    .00
    .00
    20.
    30.
    2.9
    Ul.
    38.
    .Uo 16.
    22.
    3-7
    .00 92.
    .00 158.
    29.
    52.
    1.9
    • 5
    1.0
    .20
    • 50
    .10
    .20
    .50
    .10
    .20
    .20
    .1*0
    1.0
    .20
    .ko
    .20
    .20
    .20
    -20-
    [4-32
    

    -------
    IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
    As was stated In the introduction to this report, more compre-
    hensive studies could he made of this situation to definitely determine
    the direction and movement of contaminated water through the limestone.
    However, further Investigations of this nature would he of academic
    interest only and of little value in eliminating the problem of ground-
    water contamination in this area.
    We "believe that the present study has shown this area to he
    widely contaminated. Ve also believe that the source of this contamina-
    tion is obvious. It can be stopped by construction of a sewerage system
    and an adequate sewage treatment plant for Bellevue.
    Is there a good reason to stop this contamination? ... and, if
    so, how can this be accomplished? Many reasons have been proposed for
    permitting this condition to remain. These will be briefly discussed.
    It is said that the quality of the ground water in the Bellevue
    area has excessively high hardness and total solids which make It unuse-
    able for domestic supplies. Therefore, it should not be considered as an
    aquifer. Examples were cited where several wells yielded water with
    total Bolids in excess of 1500 parts per million (ppm) and total hardness
    of over 1000 ppm.
    *
    These examples are probably true. Ground waters from limestone,
    not only in Bellevue, but throughout the State, are hard and high in total
    solids. Chemical analyses of the water from l6 wells in limestone in the
    Bellevue area are on file at the Division of Water. The average of the
    total hardness is 56^ ppm and the average total solids, 782 ppm. Four of
    these samples show extremely high total solids and hardness; however, the
    -21-
    [4-33
    

    -------
    average 1b chemically suitable for most uses. These constituents are the
    most objectionable in veil vater from Riley and Townsend Townships,
    Sandusky County.
    Another argument in favor of keeping the status quo is that there
    are very few domestic grouad-water users in the area and no industrial
    users. Therefore, very few people are affected.
    This iB truej but it should be pointed out that the reason for
    this is contamination, or fear of contamination. Many industrial veils
    have been developed in and around Bellevue only to be abandoned because
    they became contaminated. These include individual wells yielding 500
    gallons per minute (720,000 gallons per day, or over 252 million gallons
    per year!). Numerous domestic water users have had similar experiences
    with their veils. Even the city of Bellevue found it necessary to
    abandon its unsafe wells in 19^6.
    We have been advised that natural sinkholes in much of this area
    will continue to introduce pollution underground from surface drainage,
    even It Bellevue'B contribution is stopped.
    This also is true. However, the number of sinkholes, the amount
    of drainage entering them, and the concentration of pollutants In the water
    are only a fractional part of the total Bellevue contribution.
    The last, and probably the most serious, reason offered to retain
    the present system of disposal is that the total cost for a municipal
    sanitary sewerage system and a sewage treatment plant to serve the city of
    Bellevue would result in a prohibitive cost per capita. Such a project
    would be impossible to finance in the usual ways provided by law.
    -22-
    

    -------
    This, too, is apparently true. The possibility of State aid in
    this project might be Investigated. It is beyond the scope of this report
    to suggest means of financing.
    We do not feel that this problem can be ignored. It is, in fact,
    a multiple problem since it is (l) a health problem, (2) a natural
    resources problem, and, (3) a moral problem.
    -23-
    [4-351
    

    -------
    SECTION 4.1.3
    TITLE OF STODY:
    (or SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    AUTHOR:
    (or INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:
    STUDY AREA:
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES:
    Report of Investigations
    Class V Injection Well Inspections
    Oahu and Hawaii Islands, Hawaii
    Engineering Enterprises, Inc.
    Prepared for USEPA Region IX
    November, 1985
    Oahu and Hawaii Islands, Hawaii,
    USEPA Region IX
    Not applicable
    Included are inspection reports on
    three sewage disposal facilities
    in Hawaii: the Laie cesspool sump,
    the Haleiwa Shopping Plaza, and
    the Honakaa Hospital. Several
    problems with the systems are
    noted, including presence of
    pollutants of primary concern,
    operation of systems without
    permits, overflow problems, and
    uncontrolled access to the
    systems. Recommendations for
    follow-up procedures are also
    presented.
    

    -------
    REPORT OP INVESTIGATIONS
    CLASS V IKJBCTION WELL INSPECTIONS
    OABO MID HAWAII ISLAHDS, HAWAII
    FOR
    U.S. QJV IRON MENTAL HIOTECTION AGENCY
    REGION IX
    S« FRAHCISCO, CALIFORNIA
    Prepared By
    Engineering Enterprises, Inc.
    Norman, Old. ah an a
    Under EPA Contract Ho. 68-01-7011
    Work Assignment No. 9-1
    November, 1985
    

    -------
    Ill2LBe.Gfci.QILJ
    The Laie cesspool sump is a disposal facility operated by
    the City and County of Honolulu since 1962. The sump receives
    untreated sewage and cesspool wastes from authorized and un-
    authorized vacuum truck contractors. This injection well is
    actually a solution cavern in the caprock, of unknown extent.
    The untreated sewage is injected on an intermittent basis
    with a daily average of 16,400 gallons. The injection rate is
    approximately 300 gpm. The well receives an average of 16
    authorized vacuum truck loads per day, each load consisting of
    1000 gallons. The well is easily accessible to any unauthorized
    vacuum truck operators and a junkyard or dump has collected
    around it. A vent opening into the same cavern is located ap-
    proximately 15 feet from the manhole covered main access to the
    cavern. In 1969, the well and surrounding surface collapsed.
    The well was repaired by backfilling the area and pouring a
    cement surface pad. No other problems have occurred since.
    The well is completed in a cavern system in the caprock,
    consisting of Pleistocene dune sandstone and limestone. The well
    is landward of the DIC line in a protected USEW area. Dye tests
    were conducted to determine if the cavern system was directly
    connected to the ocean. No ocean outfall was found by this study.
    There are no apparent tidal effects on the water level in the
    well. There are six known wells in the vicinity of the Laie
    sump. Three wells are used for irrigation, two are domestic
    water supply wells, and one well is sealed. However, there are
    I4--3
    

    -------
    no known shallow wells in the area other than the Laie sump. No
    water supply wells are known to be downgradient of the sump,
    however, flow patterns from the cavern system are unknown. No
    analyses of the injected fluids or receiving waters were avail-
    able. The waste categories are untreated sewage waste and wastes
    from restaurant sewage grease traps. The primary pollutants of
    concern present in untreated sewage are pathogens and nitrates.
    To further assess the impact of the Laie sump on groundwater
    quality, a much better understanding of the hydrogeology of the
    area and analyses of the injected and receiving fluids are
    needed. Since the well is landward of the DIC line and in an
    underground source of drinking water (DSDW) area, it is recom-
    mended that the well be closed and alternative disposal methods
    be provided by the City and County of Honolulu. A sewage treat-
    ment plant is close by and is currently underloaded; this plant
    could easily accept the Laie sump volume of wastes (Kahuku muni-
    cipal sewage treatment plant is approximately 2 miles away). At
    a minimum, access to the sump should be restricted so that only
    authorized sewage pumping contractors could use the well and a
    more accurate accounting of injected wastes could be maintained.
    For more information, refer to Appendix A, inspection report
    4 and Appendix B, plate 0-7. Figure 24 is a photograph of the
    well and manhole cover with the junkyard in the background.
    [4-3U
    

    -------
    FIGURE 24. INSPECTION
    WITH TRASH
    4, LAIE AREA CESSPOOL
    DUMP IN BACKGROUND.
    SUMP
    ENGINrrMNG
    LLnterpnsesJnc.
    [4-4C
    

    -------
    Inspection 4
    UIC INSPECTION REPORT
    SECTIOH I - General Information
    Name of Facility: Laie Cesspool Sump
    Address: 56-020 Kamehameha Highway
    OahUr HI 967 43
    Telephone:
    Owner Address and Telephone (if different frc« above):
    City and County of Honolulu
    650 South King Street, 14th Floor
    Honolulu, HI 96 813
    (80 8) 523-43 47
    Nature of Business: Disposal of domestic cesspool wastes
    Use of Injection Wei 1 (s): Thi"s well is used to dispose of wastes
    pumped from domestic cesspools.
    Permit # (or Permit Application ~) : 001261
    Injection Well(s) Location (Island, Tax Hap Key, latitude,
    longitude, land marks, verbal description):
    Latitude: 21° 3 9' 21" N Tax Map Key #: 5-5-5:01
    Longitude: 157° 56' 15" W	Island: Oahu
    Type of Injection Well(s):
    Industri al	
    Dome st i c	JS	
    Drai nage	
    Other	
    Injection Well Currently Operating: Yes _£	 No	
    If No, Last Date Of Operation:
    Future Plans to Operate: Yes 	 No	
    If Yes, Date:
    1 of 6 Pages
    [4-4
    

    -------
    Inspection 4
    SECTION II - Hydrogeologic Information
    Well Completion Details (complete attached diagram)
    Subsurface Geology and Hydrology Data for Site:
    Wells in the area that are over 200 feet deep have static
    heads of over 13 feet above mean sea level (artesian wells).
    Injection Formation Name: Pleistocene Dune Sandstone (caprock)
    Attach the Following Information (note if unavailable):
    1.	Hap of Facility Grounds:
    2.	Well Logs(s) of Injection Well: NA
    3.	As-built Diagram of Injection Well: NA
    4.	Consultant Reports for Injection Well: NA
    5.	Monitoring Data for Injection Well: NA
    6.	Location and Data for Nearby Wells: There are six
    known wells in the vicinity. Three of these wells are
    used for irrigation, two for domestic supply and one is
    sealed. There are no known shallow wells in the area.
    7.	Monitoring Data for Nearby Wells: See attached mineral
    analyses sheet
    8.	Status of Any Down gradient Water Supply Wells: NA
    9.	Status of Any Nearby Surface Waters (possibly affected
    by well operations): NA
    2 of 6 Pages
    [4-4:
    

    -------
    Inspection 4
    SECTION III - Operating Data
    Injection Rate? Frequency, and Volume: Injection rate is
    approximately 300 gpm. Waste is recieved on an intermittant
    basis with a daily average of 16 ,400 gallons.
    Description of Injection Operation (including brief history):
    This well is used to dispose of untreated cesspool pumping
    wastes. The well currently receives approximately 16 loads
    of waste per day. The waste arrives in 1000 gallon capacity
    vacuum trucks. The well is easily accessible and private
    sewage contractors also dump there. The well has been in
    use since 1962.
    Surface Facilities/Treatment Process: None
    Wastewater Sources: Cesspools from the surrounding areas
    Generalized Waste Category( ies)/Con position: Untreated domestic
    sewage
    3 of 6 Pages
    [4-4-3
    

    -------
    Inspection 4
    Visual Appearance of Well: The well consists of a concrete shaft
    approximately 15 feet deep and 24 inches in diameter. This
    shaft opens into a solution cavity(ies) of unknown depth and
    extent. The well is covered by a steel manhole cover set in
    a 4* x 5' concrete pad.
    Method of Disposal (transport to well): Cesspool wastes are
    transported to the well by vacuum trucks.
    Previous Problems with Well: Yes 	 No	
    (e.g. clogging/ overflowing, excessive suction, etc.)
    If yes, describe: The well and surrounding surface collapsed in
    1969. It was repaired by backfilling and pouring of a
    concrete pad. No problems have occurred since.
    Attach the following (note if unavailable):
    1 • All Analyses of Wastewater: NA
    2. All Operating Records: NA
    4 of 6 Pages
    [4-44
    

    -------
    Inspection 4
    SECTION IV - Inspection Specifics
    Name and Affiliation of Inspectors: Lorraine Council, EEI
    David She par d, EEI
    William Bohrer -
    EPA Region IX
    Name and Affiliation of Facility Contact: David Nagamine
    Dept. of Public Works
    City & County of
    Honolulu
    Joe Merindino
    Operator
    Date: 8/5/85	Time: 11:45 am
    Reason for Inspection: The inspection is part of an EPA
    nationwide inventory and assessment of the various types of
    Class V injection wells. This facility was primarily
    inspected to verify the permit application information
    submitted to the Hawaii Department of Health and to observe
    the condition of the injection well and any related
    processes.
    Number of Injection Wells: 1
    Number of Injection Wells Inspected: 1
    Site Conditions at Inspection:
    (e.g.) weather, tides, description of environs, etc.)
    Sunny, 85° This well is located next to a small open dump.
    There is also an open hole (vent) to the cavern system
    approximately 25* from the well.
    Inspection Comments: The well has been used since 1962 to
    dispose of untreated cesspool pumping wastes. The well
    opens into a solution cavern of unknown extent. The City
    and County of Honolulu disposes of approximately 1600
    gallons per day of wastes in this well. The well- is easily
    accessible and it is known that various private cesspool
    maintenance contractors use the well without authorization.
    The City and County of Honolulu stated that they will place
    a lockable cover on the well to restrict access. There is
    al so a nat ur al "vent" to the cav er n a f ew feet aw ay f r om the
    well; access to this will also need to be restricted to
    prevent unauthorized dumping. The area immediately
    surrounding the area is used as a rural "open" trash dump.
    5 of 6 Pages
    [4-4
    

    -------
    Inspection 4
    This well is above the proposed DIC line and is in an USDW
    area. There are several domestic water supply wells in this
    area. These wells may or may not be downgradient from the
    injection well as flow patterns from the cavern are unknown.
    This well should be closed and an alternate disposal method
    provided. There is a municipal sewage treatment plant
    nearby which could easily accept this volume of waste.
    6 of 6 Pages
    

    -------
    Inspection
    Elevation at top of casing—,
    35 ft., msl /
    Total Papth unknown ft
    30
    Hole Diameter.
    In.
    Casing: (^Perforated
    ~ Screen
    Material
    Length _
    N/A
    Diameter.
    ft.
    .In.
    Wall
    Thickness.
    Openings _
    	In.
    .sq. In./L.F.
    
    
    
    * II
    
    V
    V
    
    #•»
    ' f,
    
    •
    ft
    
    • r
    • 1
    
    4
    •>
    
    
    
    v
    <0 •
    (JOq
    K
    OoC
    >°X
    O'o
    00
    IC
    r,o
    .•o,
    'jo
    I UO
    p.°
    i «,£
    lJ£
    -Ground Elevation
    ___JL5	ft-, msl
    -Cement Grout
    Length IS ft.
    ¦Solid Casing:
    Mat AHal Concrete
    Length '5
    Diameter ID.
    Wall
    Thickness	
    Rock Size.
    Open Hole:
    Length	
    Diameter
    2^
    -Rock Packing
    Length	
    ft.
    _ln.
    .In.
    .ft.
    .In.
    .ft.
    _ln.
    NOTES•
    L. For existing wells, provide actual elevation section.
    2.	Include additional casing, grout seal, liner cubes, sump, etc.
    if applicable.
    3.	If design of well differs substantially, orovide section showing
    actual construction.
    

    -------
    MINERAL ANALYSES
    LOCATION
    Waimanalo
    Exploratory Well II
    	12£2	
    Kahuku Well
    No. 1
    1982
    Specific conductance
    micromhos 9 25°C 	
    pH value 	
    Turbidity 	
    Color 	
    IN PARTS PER MILLION
    Silica 	
    Calcium 	
    Magnesium 	
    Sodium 	
    Potassium 	
    Bicarbonate 	
    Sulfate 			
    Chloride 	
    Fluoride 	
    Nitrate 	-	
    Phosphate 	
    Iron	)	{
    Manganese )	(
    Copper	)	Less than	(
    Lead	)	(
    Arsenic )	(
    Selenium )	(
    Chromium a/ )	(
    Total dissolved solids 	
    Alkalinity 	
    Total hardness 	
    IN EQUIVALENTS PER MILLION
    Calcium (Ca) 	
    Magnesium (Mg) 	
    Sodium (Na) 	
    Potassium (K) 	
    Bicarbonate (HCO ) 	
    Sulfate (SO ) 	
    Chloride (CI) b/ 	
    Nitrate (NO ) 	
    TOTALS 	
    158
    7.95
    3.5
    10.4
    243
    7.35
    0.1
    0.1
    51
    10
    6.3
    15
    0.9
    65
    5.6
    18
    0.05
    1.6
    0.35
    .02
    .02
    .02
    .02
    .01
    .01
    .01
    174
    53
    51
    46
    8.6
    7.5
    31
    0.8
    70
    7.0
    36
    0.05
    5.8
    0.40
    .02
    .02
    .02
    .02
    .01
    .01
    .01
    213
    57
    53
    0.499
    0.429
    .559
    ; .517
    .646
    1.349
    .023
    .020
    1.065
    1.147
    .116
    .145
    .520
    1.030
    .026
    .093
    3.454
    4.330
    a/
    b/
    Hexavalant only.
    Includes fluoride and phosphate as PO,
    [4-43
    

    -------
    insss&isiUt-
    The Haleiwa Shopping Plaza is operated by Hawaiian Manage-
    ment Corporation and contains shopsr restaurants, a bank, and a
    medical clinic. Sewage effluent is piped to two catch basins,
    one on each side of the shopping center, and then to three injec-
    tion wells. One settling basin is connected to a single well.
    The other solids catch basin is connected to two well s in series.
    The medical center wastewater appears to be connected to the
    catch basin with two injection wells. At the time of inspection,
    the second well in the double well series was overflowing into
    the parking lot.
    The shopping plaza was inspected to obtain information on
    its sewage treatment facilities since it was in a non-sewered
    area and had not appl ied f or an ope rati ng permit or submitted any
    data to the Department of Health. It is unknown exactly what
    wastes are being disposed of but, in general, the wastes are
    untreated sewage, food establishment wastewater, and whatever
    substances are disposed down the medical center drains. The
    wells have experienced clogging and overflow problems in the past
    and there have been public complaints about odor from the system.
    The wells have been previously rehabilitated but will probably
    require regular maintenance to prevent overflow.
    Completion data for the wells were not available; it is
    unknown which formation is receiving the wastewater. The wells
    are located slightly landward of the UIC line, in the protected
    aquifer area. There are nine wells in the area, five of the
    [4-49}
    

    -------
    wells are unused and the other four wells are used as irrigation
    wells. No analyses of the receiving water or injected fluids
    were available. Access to the wells is protected only by metal
    protective lids nearly flush with land surface. One well is in a
    parking lot area and the other two wells are hidden in a land-
    scaped area of the parking lot.
    Very little information exists concerning these three wells
    since the operator had not submitted a permit application and the
    necessary information- It is very difficult, if not impossible
    to assess the impact of the wells on groundwater quality. The
    operator should immediately be notified by the Hawaii Department
    of Health to submit a permit application and the associated
    information needed for continued operation. The wells and
    settling basins should be maintained on a regular basis to pre-
    vent further overflow problems. This operation should be
    inspected again once a permit application has been submitted to
    verify the application information and gather the necessary in-
    formation to assess the impact of the operation on groundwater
    quality. Additionally, the medical center personnel should be
    interviewed to ascertain exactly what is disposed of through the
    sewer system.
    More information is presented in Appendix A, inspection
    report B and Appendix B, plate 0-4. Figures 32 - 34 are
    photographs of the two injection wells connected in series. The
    well shown in Figure 33 is overflowing into the parking lot.
    [4-5C
    

    -------
    IGURE 22.
    INSPECT
    ION 3,
    ~"MLl. \'4n
    shop0:
    :jg ^laza : of 3
    
    WELLS 'J
    SED TO
    p o c r
    cf =°>:
    MARY TREATED
    
    SEWAGE.
    FOOD,
    '••n
    11 U i *. u. J
    ical :e
    .'1TER WAST EWAT c,R
    ENGINEERING ,
    LLnterprisesflnc.,
    

    -------
    FIGURE 33. INSPECTION 3, KALEIWA SHOPPING PLAZA
    OVERFLOWING INJECTION WELL USED "0
    DISPOSE SEWAGE, FOOD, AND MEDICAL
    CENTER WASTEWATER.
    ENGINEERING [4-52]
    LLnterprisesJnc.
    

    -------
    FIGURE 34. INSPECTION 3, -AL EI WA SHOPP I.NG PLAZA
    2 OF 3 INJECTIC:: WELLS USED "0 DISPOSE
    OF SEWAGE, FOOC, AND MEDICAL CEN7ES
    WASTEWATER.
    engineering 14-531
    LLnterprisesJnc.
    

    -------
    Inspection 8
    QIC INSPECTION REPORT
    SECTIOH I - General Information
    Name of Facility: Haleiwa Shopping Plaza
    Address: Ram eh am eh a Highway
    Haleiwa, HI
    Telephone: (80 8) 622-517 9
    Owner Address and Telephone (i£ different frca above):
    Hawaiian Management Corporation
    Nature of Business: Shopping center and restaurants
    Use of Injection Wei 1 (s): Three wells are used to dispose of
    domestic and food wastes from the shops in the center.
    Permit # (or Permit Application ~ ): None
    Injection Well(s) Location (Island# Tax Hap Key, latitude,
    longitude, land marksf verbal description): See Above
    Latitude: 21° 35' 30" N	Island: Oahu
    Longitude: 158° 06' 20" W
    Type of Injection Well(s):
    Industrial	
    Dome st i c	X	
    Dr ai na ge	
    Other		
    Injection Well Currently Operating:	Yes _Z	 No	
    If No, Last Date Of Operation:
    Future Plans to Operate: Yes 		No 	
    If Yes, Date:
    1 of 5 Pages
    [4-54
    

    -------
    Inspection 8
    SECTION II - Bydrogeologic Information
    Well Completion Details (complete attached diagram)
    Subsurface Geology and Hydrology Data for Site:
    For area wells deeper than 150 feet the static head is
    between 10 and 16 feet above sea level, while for shallower
    wells (< 100 feet) the static head is 3 to 4 feet above sea
    level.
    Injection Formation Name: Unknown
    Attach the Following Information (note if unavailable) :
    1.	Hap of Facility Grounds: NA
    2.	Well Logs(s) of Injection Well: NA
    3.	As-built Diagram of Injection Well: NA
    4.	Consultant Reports for Injection Well: NA
    5.	Monitoring Data for Injection Well: NA
    6.	Location and Data for Nearby Wells: There are nine
    wells in the vicinity. Three of these wells are
    observation well sf four are i rrigation well sf one is
    sealed and one is unused.
    7.	Monitoring Data for Nearby Wells: NA
    8.	Status of Any Dovngradient Water Supply Wells: NA
    9.	Status of Any Nearby Surface Waters (possibly affected
    by well operations): NA
    2 of 5 Pages
    [4-5"
    

    -------
    Inspection 8
    SECTION III - Operating Data
    Injection Rate, Frequency, and Volume:
    The injection volume and rate are unknown at this time. Most
    of the shops in the center are open from 8 am - 10 pn, which
    is when most wastes would be generated and injected.
    Description of Injection Operation (including brief history):
    The waste is piped to two catch basins where solids are
    trapped, the effluent then flows to wells. The shopping
    plaza is built in two sections? each section has catch
    basins and wells. The east half has 2 wells while the west
    half has only 1 well. The facility is at least 5 years old.
    Surface Facilities/Treatnent Process:
    None
    Wastewater Sources:
    Domestic and restaurant wastes from shops and restaurants in
    the center. There is also a family medical clinic which is
    connected to the system.
    Generalized Waste Category*ies)/Composition:
    See Above
    3 of 5 Pages
    [4-5.'
    

    -------
    Inspection 8
    Visual Appearance o£ Well:
    The wel 1 s are const r ucted of 3" PVC pipe. The w el Is are set
    below ground surface and accessed through a small steel
    cover. One wel 1 had backed up and f il 1 ed the access area at
    the time if inspection. This well has been kncwn to backup
    in the past at various times.
    Method of Disposal (transport to well):
    Well recieves effluent from solids traps through a 3"
    pi peline.
    Previous Problems with Well: Yes X	 No	
    (e.g. clogging, overflowing, excessive suction, etc.)
    Overflowing
    If yesr describe:
    The wells have been redrilled. There had been overflow and
    odor problems in the past which prompted public complaints.
    The Hawaii Department of Health had been notified in the
    past.
    Attach the following (note if unavailable):
    1. All Analyses o£ Wastewater: NA
    2. All Operating Records: NA
    4 of 5 Pages
    [4-57
    

    -------
    Inspection 8
    SECTION IV - Inspection Specifics
    Naae and Affiliation of
    Inspectors: Lorraine Council, EEI
    David She par dr EEI
    William Bohrer -
    EPA Region IX
    Name and Affiliation of Facility Contact: Hike Sele
    Maintenance Man
    Hawaiian Property
    Management Company
    Date: 8/6/35	Time: 10:00 am
    Reason for Inspection: The inspection is part of an EPA
    nationwide inventory and assessment of the various types of
    Class V injection wells. This facility was primarily
    inspected to obtain information on its sewage disposal
    facilities since no permit application had been filed with
    the Hawaii Department of Health and there is no regional
    sewage system in the area.
    Number of Injection Wells: 3
    Number of Injection Wells Inspected: 3
    Site Conditions at Inspection:
    (e.g.) weather, tides, description of environs, etc.)
    Partly Cloudy, 85°
    Inspection Consents: This facility has three wells used to
    dispose of wastewater from a shopping center and a family
    medical clinic. The waste is sent to catch basins (solids
    traps) where solids are removed prior to injection. Very
    little data was available from the inspection contact, and
    no permit application has been filed. The operators will be
    notified by the Hawaiian Health Department of the need to
    file a permit application.
    These wells have experienced clogging and overflow problems
    in the past. There have been public complaints about odor
    problems in the past. One well was overflowing at the time
    of inspection. The inspection contact stated that he would
    notify the well maintenance contractor and have the well
    rehabilitated. There are nine wells in the area, however
    only four of these are used (all four are irrigation wells).
    5 of 5 Pages
    [4-5i
    

    -------
    Inspection 8
    AVAILABLE CONSTRUCTION INFORMATION APPLICABLE
    TO ALL THREE INJECTION WELLS
    Elevation at top of casing—
    	ft., msl l_
    Total Papth bo ? ft.
    Hol« Diameter.
    In.
    Casing:
    Material
    Length _
    ~	Perforated
    ~	Screen
    Diameter.
    Wall
    Thickness.
    Openings _
    ft.
    .in.
    In.
    .sq. In./L.F.
    00°
    o«0
    00
    %
    %
    oO
    °0*
    0»
    DO"]
    ioOi
    °>d
    4*
    $
    23 o I
    .01
    ,3
    
    « 0
    .0 •
    60 o
    r


    -------
    lAase.££iaiLJ-2
    The Honakaa Hospital was inspected to observe the sewage
    waste disposal facilities, consisting of an injection well piped
    into a lava tube. The "well" was originally constructed in 1949
    as the County Highway Baseyard cesspool. During excavation, a
    lava tube (8 feet depth x 10 feet wide) was encountered and
    subsequently used as a sewage disposal site. The Honakaa county
    hospital was constructed in 1951. A sewer line was constructed
    to connect the hospital to the lava tube sewage disposal site,
    approximately 1400 feet away. Subsequently, several other estab-
    lishments connected to the sewer line; it is unknown exactly
    which establishments are connected.
    The "well" receives wastes from at least the hospital, two
    churches, two commercial buildings, and possibly the post office.
    All wastes, except the hospital wastes, are believed to be
    strictly sewage wastes. In addition to restroom and kitchen
    wastes, the hospital generates surgical, laboratory, and possibly
    photographic x-ray chemical wastes. The surgical and laboratory
    wastes contain body fluids and, if present, the photochemical
    wastes will consist of spent fixer and developer from an x-o-mat
    processor. All wastes are disposed of without treatment. The
    best estimate of injection rate and volume are an average rate of
    4.8 gpm for a daily volume of 6 900 gallons. The maximum esti-
    mated volume is 20 ,000 gpd. The "well" is actually a manhole
    leading to the lava tube. The well wafted strong odors when
    inspected. Additionally the manhole cover to the well was too
    [4-SC
    

    -------
    large and about one third of it was broken off. Access to the
    well is uncontrolled.
    The well is completed in a lava tube of the near surface
    basaltic lava (name unknown). The well is definitely landward of
    the DIC line, in the protected aquifer area. The lava tube
    extent and direction, which control the fate of the wastes dis-
    posed, are unknown. A municipal water supply well was recently
    installed about a quarter mile almost directly "downgradient" of
    the injection well (assuming the lava tube issues directly toward
    the ocean).
    No analyses of the waste stream injected or the receiving
    wastes are available and very little information concerning the
    hydrogeology of the site is known. However, the disposal well is
    injecting in a USEW area upgradient of a municipal water supply
    well. It is strongly recommended that unless proven environment-
    ally safe, the injection well should be replaced with alternative
    and much improved sewage treatment facilities as soon as possi-
    ble. Otherwise, the municipal water supply well should be relo-
    cated to avoid possibly intercepting the raw sewage waste stream.
    Additional information is presented in Appendix A, inspec-
    tion report 17 and Appendix B, plate H-44. Figures 52 and 53 are
    photographs of the injection well completed in the lava tube.
    [4-S-
    

    -------
    FIGURE 53. INSPECTION 17, HOflAKAA HOSPITAL, INJECTION
    WELL COMPLETED IN LAV A TL'SE, TO DISPOSE OF
    HOSPITAL, BUSINESS, AND RESIDENTIAL
    UNTREATED SEWAGE WASTEWATER.
    engineering [4"S2
    LEnterprisesJnc.
    

    -------
    INSPECTION 17, HQNAKAA
    WELL COMPLETED IN LAVA
    HOSPITAL, BUSINESS, AN
    SEWAGE WATERWATER.
    HOSPITAL, INJECTION
    TUBE. TO DISPOSE OF
    RESIDENTIAL UNTREATED
    engineering [4;63
    LLnterprises.lnc.
    

    -------
    Inspection 17
    UIC INSFECTICH REPORT
    SECTION I - General Information
    Name of Facility: Honokaa Hospital
    Address: Honokaa Hospital
    Honokaa, HI
    Telephone:
    Owner Address and Telephone (if different frca above):
    Nature of Business: Hospital
    Use of Injection Well(s):
    The well disposes of untreated sewage from the hospital and
    an unknown number of businesses and residences.
    Permit # (or Permit Application #): None
    Injection Well(s) Location (Island, Tax Hap Key, latitude,
    longitude, landmarks, verbal description):
    The well is located approximately 1,100 feet north of the
    hospital and approximately 450 feet north of Mamene Street.
    Latitude: 20°05'00" N	Island: Hawaii
    Longitude: 155028*21" W
    Type of Injection Well(s):
    Industrial	
    Domestic	X	
    Drainage	
    Others	JL_	
    Injection Well Currently Operating: Yes 	 No 	
    If No, Last Date Of Operation:
    Future Plans to Operate: Yes	 No	
    If Yes, Date:
    1 of 5 Pages
    [4-54.
    

    -------
    Inspection 17
    SECTION II - Eydrogeologic Information
    Well Completion Details (complete attached diagram)
    Subsurface Geology and Hydrology Data for Site:
    The elevation of the groundwater surface is approximately
    mean sea level. Flow direction is toward the coast.
    Injection Formation Name: NA-basaltic lava (pahoehoe)
    with lava tubes
    Attach the Following Information (note if unavailable):
    1.	Hap of Facility Grounds: NA
    2.	Well Logs(s) of Injection Well: NA
    3.	As-built Diagram of Injection Well: NA
    4.	Consultant Reports for Injection Well: NA
    5.	Monitoring Data for Injection Well: NA
    6.	Location and Data for Nearby Wells:
    A municipal water supply well is approximately 600
    yards away in a direction thought to be almost directly
    downgradient.
    7.	Monitoring Data for Nearby Wells: NA
    8.	Status of Any Downgradientwater Supply Wells:
    No observed effects.
    9.	Status of Any Nearby Surface Waters (possibly affected
    by well operations): NA
    2 of 5 Pages
    [4-S5
    

    -------
    Inspection 17
    SECTION III - Operating Data
    Injection Rate, Frequency, and Vol one:
    The best estimates of injection rate and volume are an
    average rate of 4.8 gpm for a daily volume of 6900 gallons.
    The maximum estimated volume is 20 ,000 gpd.
    Description of Injection Operation (including brief history):
    The hospital was started in 1951 and provides general
    medical care to the local community. The hospital averages
    16 in-patients at any one time. No one is sure when the
    well was constructed.
    Surface Facilities/Treatment Process:
    None.
    Wastewater Sources:
    Untreated domestic wastes from the hospital and surrounding
    business and residences hooked into the well. The hospital
    laboratory also disposes of lab samples (blood, urine, spi-
    nal fluid, etcJ through the system, however these materials
    are sterilized in an autoclave before disposal. It is also
    possible that x-ray developing wastes are disposed of
    through the well.
    Generalized Waste Category(ies)/Composition:
    Untreated domestic sewage and some sterilized lab wastes. A
    substantial amount of storm water runoff is also believed to
    enter the well.
    3 of 5 Pages
    [4-G«
    

    -------
    Inspection 17
    Visaal Appearance of Well:
    The wel 1 isanopenholewitha concrete casing 18 inches in
    diameter leading into a large lava tube of unknown extent.
    Three pipes (one, 8" and two, 4") carry wastes to the well.
    These pipes enter the well approximately 3 feet below grade.
    The well is covered by a 24" diameter steel manhole cover
    which is cracked and broken.
    Method of Disposal (transport to veil):
    Wastes are transported to the well by gravity flow sewer
    lines.
    Previous Problems with Hell: Yes 	 No X	
    (e.g. clogging, overflowing, excessive suction, etc.)
    If yes, describe:
    Attach the following (note if unavailable):
    1. All Analyses of Wastewater: NA
    2. All Operating Records; NA
    4 of 5 Pages
    [4-67
    

    -------
    Inspection 17
    SECTION IV - Inspection Specifics
    Name and Affiliation of Inspectors: Lorraine Council, EEI
    David Shepardr EEI
    Dayton Fraim, Hawaii
    State Department of Health
    Name and Affiliation of Facility Contact: Walter Johannsen
    Hospital Maintenance
    Date: 8/11/85	Time: 10:00 am
    Reason for Inspection: The inspection is part of an EPA
    nationwide inventory and assessment of the various types of
    Class V injection wells. This facility was inspected be-
    cause it injects raw sewage from the Hospital and an unknown
    number of businesses and residences upgradient from the
    municipal water supply well. The injection well owner/ope-
    rator had not filed a permit application with the Hawaii
    Department of Health.
    Number of Injection Wells: 1
    Number of Injection Wells Inspected: 1
    Site Conditions at Inspection:
    (e.g.) weather, tides, description of environs, etc.)
    Overcast, 7 8°
    Inspection Coaments: This well is used to dispose of untreated
    wastes from a small hospital and an undetermined number of
    businesses and private residences. The well enters a large
    lava tube of unknown extent. No one contacted knew the
    exact date of well construction, but it is known that the
    well was in use as early as 1951. A municipal water supply
    well was recently constructed a few hundred yards away in a
    direction thought to be almost directly downgradient. An
    alternate disposal method for the waste needs to be found
    and the injection well closed or the water supply well
    relocated. There is too great of a contamination potential
    to allow the continued operation of both wells.
    5 of 5 Pages
    
    

    -------
    I nspect ion
    Elevation at top of casing—j
    -IPSO ft., msl /
    Total Depth
    20
    Hole Diameter 18 In.
    Casing: (^Perforated
    ~ Screen
    Material
    Length _
    Diameter.
    Wall
    Thickness.
    Openings _
    .ft.
    .in.
    .In.
    .sq. in«/L.F.
    T"
    Cto
    r*
    •' r
    o
    0
    00 0
    go°
    ObC
    JiQ\
    Q°o
    oo
    l°a'
    '»?C
    t#
    i 0 o
    0*2.
    |*3°
    -Ground Elevation
    ^1080 ft,, msl
    -Cement Grout
    Length	
    Solid Casing:
    Material	
    Length	
    Diameter ID.
    Wail
    Thickness	
    -Rock Packing
    Length	
    Rock Size.
    Open Hole:
    Length	
    Diameter
    .ft.
    .ft.
    In.
    In.
    .ft.
    .in.
    .ft.
    _in.
    NOTES :
    1.	For existing wells, oroviae accuai eievacion section.
    2.	Include additional casing, grout seal, liner cubes, sumo, etc.
    if applicaole.
    3.	If design of well differs suDStantially, proviae section snowing
    actual construction.
    

    -------
    Section 4.2
    Septic System Supporting Data
    i [ 4—71D
    

    -------
    SECTION 4.2.1
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (or SOURCE OF INVESTIGATION)
    AUTHOR:
    (or INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:
    STUDY AREA:
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES:
    Industry-Owned Septic Systems:
    San Fernando Valley Basin
    Engineering Enterprises, Inc.
    Prepared for USEPA Region IX
    1986
    San Fernando Valley Basin,
    California, USEPA Region IX
    Not applicable
    This study consists of four parts:
    (1) general background, (2)
    hydrogeology and water use in the
    San Fernando Valley Basin, (3)
    outline of the Los Angeles
    Department of Water and Power's
    San Fernando Valley Basin
    Groundwater Investigation and
    resulting management plan, and (4)
    summary and assessment of City
    Ordinance 1603 8 8 and the implemen-
    tation efforts of the L.A.
    Department of Public Works. The
    groundwater investigation revealed
    that TCE, PCE, and other chemicals
    were present at low concentrations
    in a number of wells in the San
    Fernando Valley Basin. The
    presence of chemicals was believed
    to industrial and
    disposal into septic
    The city ordinance
    the city to require
    and commercial
    facilities to connect to available
    public sewer lines.
    to be due
    commerc ial
    sys t ems.
    empowered
    industrial
    [4-71^
    

    -------
    INDUSTRIAL OWNED SEPTIC SYSTEMS
    SAN FERNANDO VALLEY BASIN
    I. GENERAL BACKGROUND
    In late 197S, the California State Department of Health
    Services (DOHS) requested that all major water suppliers using
    groundwater conduct tests for the presence of certain industrial
    chemicals. These initial tests, completed in the spring of 1980,
    showed that trichloroethylene (TCE), perchloroethylene (PCE), and
    other chemicals were present at low concentrations in a number of
    wells in the San Fernando Valley Basin (SFVB) (Refer to Figure 1
    for the SFVB study area.)
    In response to these findings, the Los Angeles Department of
    Water and Power (LADWP), through a cooperative agreement with the
    Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), applied to
    the California State Water Resources Control Board for EPA
    funding under the 208 Grant Program. Other participating cities
    included Burbank, Glendale, and San Fernando. Funds were
    received and work began in July of 1981. Activities of the study
    included field investigations, industrial site surveys, records
    and archives searches, literature reviews, and water quality
    analyses of more than 600 samples. (LADWP: "Groundwater Quality
    Management Plan? SFVB," 19 83.)
    Based upon the study's findings, a recommendation for the
    regulation of Private Sewage Disposal Systems (PSDS) in the SFVB
    was proposed. This recommendation called for the promulgation
    and implementation of a city ordinance which would require the
    phasing-out of PSDS on commercial and industrial properties m
    [4-72
    

    -------
    LOS ANGELES COUNTY
    VENTURA COUNTY
    San Fernando
    Burbank
    o
    o
    Glendale
    o Pasadena
    Beverly Hills
    CITY OF LOS ANGELES
    ORANGE COUNTY
    0 5 10 15
    Scale in Miles
    | | SAN FERNANDO VALLEY BASIN
    VICINITY MAP
    SAN FERNANDO VALLEY
    (from LADWP's 'Groundwater Quality Management Plan, SFV8," 1983)
    BUGSNISfflNG
    ENTERPRISES. INC.
    	Figure 1
    [4-73]
    

    -------
    the SFVB. Proposed regulatory tasks were assigned to potentially
    responsible regulatory agencies.
    In 19 85, two years after completion of the LADWP study, the
    City of Los Angeles passed Ordinance 160388. This ordinance
    essentially empowered the city, through its agencies, to order
    owners of industrial and commercial PSDS to connect to available
    public sewer lines.
    The Los Angeles Department of Public Works began
    implementing the ordinance upon its passage- A field survey was
    conducted by the Bureau of Sanitation in 1986 to identify owners
    of commercial and industrial PSDS in the SFVB. All identified
    owners were mailed letters informing them of the new City
    ordinance. Notices to Connect are currently being issued by the
    Bureau. The Bureau of Sanitation has also instituted a PSDS
    sampling program to identify systems which have been used to
    dispose of industrial (chemical) wastes. These systems will be
    issued Notices to Connect first, in order to reduce the continued
    pollution of the SFVB. As of September 1986, seven such PSDS
    sites have been discovered.
    Section II of this case study provides background
    information on the SFVB. The third section outlines the LADWP
    SFVB groundwater investigation and management plan. Material
    presented within these sections has been excerpted and condensed
    from LADWP's, "Groundwater Quality Management Plan; San Fernando
    Valley Basin," 1983. The remaining sections of this study are
    written by EEI and summarize and assess City Ordinance 160388
    2
    [4-74
    

    -------
    and the implementation efforts of the L.A. Department of Public
    Works.
    II. BACKGROUND
    A. SFVB Hydrogeology
    Groundwater in the SFVB is stored in the alluvial deposits
    which comprise the valley fill. The distribution of these
    deposits has resulted in a characteristic difference in
    groundwater conditions between the eastern and western portions
    of the basin.
    The alluvial deposits in the eastern portion of the SFVB are
    comprised primarily of sands and gravels with some localized
    lenses of silts and clays interbedded. Conditions in the eastern
    portion of the SFVB are therefore characterized by high soil
    permeability and groundwater production. Groundwater in the
    eastern SFVB is generally unconfined with a depth to water table
    from 50 to 200 feet. The presence of clay lenses partially
    restricts the vertical movement of groundwater.
    The western portion of the basin, on the other hand,
    consists of finer sediments and clays exhibiting low permeability
    and low water yields. In the western SFVB, groundwater generally
    is confined or partially confined; and rising water or artesian
    flow is common in this area. Groundwater in the western portion
    also contains higher total dissolved solids (TDS) concentrations
    than groundwater in the eastern portion.
    Groundwater flow in the SFVB is southeasterly, from the
    

    -------
    recharge areas on the alluvial fans along the edges of the valley
    fill, toward the basin outlet area at the Los Angeles River
    Narrows. Figure 2 shows groundwater flow directions and the
    variations in estimated groundwater flow velocities over the
    basin.
    Because of the dense grouping of wells in certain areas and
    the extensive pumping of groundwater, several large cones of
    depression have formed in the water table. These cones of
    depression have caused significant changes in the natural
    groundwater flow patterns and generally persist throughout the
    year despite the highly seasonal variation in pumping activities.
    Three large cones of depression in the SFVB water table exist in
    the North Hollywood, Crystal Springs, and Pollock well fields
    (LADWP, 1983).
    B. Water Use
    The San Fernando Valley Groundwater Basin is a natural
    underground reservoir that represents an important source of
    drinking water for the Los Angeles metropolitan area. In
    addition to supplying annual water needs, this groundwater basin
    holds large quantities of stored water which can be extracted
    during droughts and replenished during years of surplus water
    supply.
    Groundwater extractions from the basin are also important
    water supplies for the Cities of Burbank, Glendale, San Fernando
    and the unincorporated La Crescenta area of the county of Los
    Angeles (Figure 3). All the above agencies can draw upon
    4
    [4-7-S
    

    -------
    z
    3
    O
    w
    Q
    O
    o
    s
    Ol
    a
    Ol
    M
    <
    o
    e
    3
    a
    0)
    ©
    z
    O	tn
    X
    ° 5	j
    § *	2
    Q O	cr)
    C <	>
    U1 £ U > £ U
    * r °
    li?
    < o u o
    -J
    
    -J
    
    .J
    
    <
    
    <
    
    •J
    
    a
    —L
    o
    
    <
    
    z
    Ul
    £
    Ui
    <
    >
    e
    a
    UJ
    >
    
    >—
    <
    >-
    
    UJ
    e
    e
    
    <
    c
    X
    o
    ui
    
    o
    
    o
    <
    3
    
    u
    
    w
    £
    o
    a
    Z
    <
    Z
    <5
    tal
    <
    u»
    u. O X	-
    O
    
    
    3 -i
    GROUNDWATER FLOW (1980)
    SAN FERNANDO VALLEY BASIN
    (from LADWP's, "Groundwater Quality Management Plan, SFVB", 1983)
    ENGINEERING
    ENTERPRISES, INC.
    Figure 2
    [4-771
    

    -------
    Q. U
    POLITICAL BOUNDARIES
    SAN FERNANDO VALLEY BASIN
    (from LADWP's 'Groundwater Quality Management Plan, SFVB." 1983)
    ENGINEERING
    ENTERPRISES, INC.
    Figure 3
    L4-78]
    

    -------
    groundwater stored in the basin for use during droughts or
    emergencies when sufficient water from the Metropolitan Water
    District of Southern California (MWD) may not be available.
    Groundwater extractions typically supply about 15 percent of Los
    Angeles' water, nearly all of San Fernando's and about half of La
    Crescenta's requirements (LADWP, 1983).
    There are six general types of water use in the SFVB (LADWP,
    1983) .
    1.	Domestic - use for residences, including incidental
    irrigated gardens and orchards.
    2.	Industrial - use by a manufacturing or service industry
    that involves water being used directly in the
    manufacturing process or service.
    3.	Commercial - use by manufacturing and other commercial
    establishments whose primary water requirement is for
    the lavatory needs of employees and clients and may
    include incidental irrigation of ornamental plants.
    4.	Irrigation - use for irrigated agriculture including
    incidental stockwater and domestic use.
    5.	Recreation - use for swimming, boating, hunting, or
    f ishing.
    6.	Municipal - use for domestic, industrial, commercial,
    irrigation, and recreation purposes; including fire
    protection and use for other municipal functions or
    services by a municipality, public utility or district.
    III. THE LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF WATER & POWER'S
    SAN FERNANDO VALLEY BASIN GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION
    A. Background
    In early 1980, the industrial chemicals tnchloroe thy 1 ene
    (TCE) and perchloroethylene (PCE), were discovered in the
    groundwater of the San Fernando Valley Basin (SFVB). TCE, the
    major contaminant found, was detected in approximately one-fourth
    

    -------
    of the groundwater wells tested in the SFVB, at concentrations in
    excess of the current level recommended for drinking water by the
    California State Department of Health Services (DOHS).
    In response to these findings, the Los Angeles Department of
    Water and Power (LADWP), and the Southern California Association
    of Governments (SCAG) received EPA funds to embark upon a two-
    year study which began in July, 1981. The scope of the study was
    to determine the extent and severity of the contamination and to
    develop strategies to control the groundwater contamination
    problem. The specific objective of the study was to develop a
    basin-wide groundwater quality management plan which would
    include recommendations for the implementation of strategies to
    ensure the future protection and safe use of the groundwater
    basin (LADWP, 1983).
    B. Extent of Groundwater Contamination in the SFVB
    A groundwater quality testing program was conducted by the
    LADWP to more accurately define both the extent and severity of
    contamination by volatile organic compounds (VOC's) in the SFVB.
    Samples from 135 production and monitoring wells throughout the
    SFVB were analyzed for the presence of organic contaminants.
    Complete Gas Chromatograph-Mass Spectrometer (GC-MS) scans
    allowed detection of as many as 36 possible VOC's. GC-MS scans
    were performed on more than 60 groundwater samples taken from 4 5
    selected wells.
    [4-8C
    

    -------
    Gas Chromatograph (GC) analysis was used to measure the
    concentrations of individual contaminants in the groundwater. GC
    analyses for TCE and PCE were performed on more than 600
    groundwater samples. This information was used to better define
    the temporal and areal distribution of these hazardous chemicals
    in the SFVB.
    The results of the groundwater testing program revealed that
    TCE and PCE were present in approximately 45 percent of the water
    supply wells located in the eastern portion of the SFVB, at
    concentrations exceeding the action levels recommended by the
    State DOHS. TCE concentrations generally ranged from 5 to 50
    ppb. Maximum TCE concentrations from 200 to 500 ppb, however,
    were found in several sampled wells. Average PCE concentrations
    ranged from 4 to 50 ppb with a maximum level of 130 ppb PCE
    detected in one well.
    Groundwater sampled in four general areas within the SFVB
    were shown to be contaminated. These areas were located in, and
    surrounding. North Hollywood, Crystal Springs, La Crescenta, and
    the Pollock; well field. Water supply systems operated by the
    Cities of Los Angeles, Burbank, Glendale, and the Crescenca
    Valley County Water District were affected {LADWP, 1983).
    C. Potential Sources of Groundwater Contamination
    The extent of TCE and PCE contamination found in the
    groundwater quality testing program supported che theory chat
    this contamination was attributable to "a large number of sources.
    A field investigation was initiated to examine the sources of
    7
    [4-81
    

    -------
    groundwater contamination, and to evaluate industries' handling
    and disposal practices of hazardous materials within the San
    Fernando Valley. This investigation included the evaluation of
    private disposal systems, sewer exfiltration systems and
    permitted waste discharges at commercial and industrial
    establishments.
    The investigation was conducted in a 1300 acre tract in
    North Hollywood which largely consisted of small industrial
    properties. The current industrial use of TCE was judged to be
    minimal. After 1966, when strict controls were placed on the use
    of TCE by the Air Pollution Control District, many industries
    eliminated its use in their degreasing operations. PCE and other
    solvents have subsequently replaced TCE in various industrial
    processes. The contamination potential posed by these chemicals
    in the North Hollywood industrial area was discovered to exist.
    Among smaller commercial and industrial facilities, waste
    disposal areas were found to be deficient. Improper disposal
    practices including on-site dumping as well as uncontrolled
    discharges to storm drains and sewer facilities were suspected to
    be "more prevalent than observed" (LADWP, 1983).
    After scrutinizing the sampling data from the groundwater
    quality testing program, a correlation between groundwater
    contamination and land use was discovered to exist. Wells which
    were found to be contaminated with TCE were located within, or
    adjacent to, commercial and industrial zones. Higher
    concentrations of TCE were detected in wells within the
    [4-82
    

    -------
    commercial and industrial corridors. In general, wells located
    in residential zones were uncontaminated (LADWP, 1983).
    D. LADWP Management Plan Recommendations
    Based upon their findings, the LADWP developed eight primary
    recommendations for the management of groundwater in the SFVB.
    These recommendations addressed, among other objectives:
    1.	The control and regulation of hazardous materials to
    minimize future contamination of the basin, and
    2.	The control and management of contaminants currently in
    the basin to assure a quality of groundwater supply
    safe for drinking (LADWP, 1983).
    LADWP's Recommendation #2 specifically provided a guideline for
    the regulation of industrial and commercial PSDS. Portions of
    this recommendation which detail the proposed development and
    implementation of PSDS regulations in the SFVB are presented
    forthwith (LADWP, 1983). (Chemicals referred to as "hazardous"
    in the recommendation are designated as such by the City of Los
    Angeles.)
    RECOMMENDATION NO. 2
    3.2 Regulation of Private Disposal Systems
    3.2.1 Introduction
    3.2.1.1	Ob:ective
    The objective of this recommendation is to prevent or to
    control contamination of groundwater in the San Fernando Valley
    by hazardous chemicals discharging from private disposal systems
    (PDS's) operated on commercial and industrial properties.
    3.2.1.2	Required Actions
    A program to fully regulate private disposal systems on
    commercial and industrial properties where hazardous wastes are
    generated or handled will require the following activities:
    14-3-3
    

    -------
    A. Identify, Investigate and Regulate Existing Private
    Disposal Systems:
    Field investigations and a survey of public works
    records should be conducted to identify all PDS's
    operated on commercial and industrial properties in
    sensitive groundwater areas of the SFVB. Inspection
    and monitoring of the effluent discharging from these
    PDS1 s should be conducted to thoroughly assess the
    impact of each PDS site on groundwater quality during
    the phaseout of these systems.
    B. Phase Out the Use of Private Disposal Systems
    A priority schedule should be developed for the
    phaseout and elimination of PDS's operated on
    commercial and industrial properties in the sensitive
    groundwater areas of the SFVB. This phaseout will
    involve the following:
    1.	In areas where public sewers are currently
    available, commercial and industrial properties
    that generate hazardous wastes should be required
    to abandon their PDS's and connect to the public
    sewer.
    2.	In areas where no sewers are available, new public
    sewers should be constructed to eliminate the use
    of PDS's on these commercially and industrially
    zoned properties.
    DEFINITION: Private disposal systems (PDS's) are on-site
    wastewater disposal systems that consist of septic tanks,
    cesspools or other wastewater retention units, and which
    discharge their effluent to the ground, usually through a
    network of subsurface perforated pipes in an area referred
    to as a leach field.
    3.2.2 Background
    A study of PDS's was conducted in a two zip code study area
    in North Hollywood within the City of Los Angeles. The study
    revealed that 88 PDS's were operated on commercial and industrial
    premises which overlie well fields in this Morth Hollywood area.
    Similarly, a large number of PDS's may be operated on other
    commercial and industrial sites throughout the sensitive
    groundwater areas of the eastern SFVB.
    While current regulations and permits specify that PDS's are
    to receive domestic type wastes only, these systems may in fact
    provide an unauthorized means for the disposal of hazardous
    liquid wastes. These hazardous wastes may then pass through the
    PDS and discharge with the effluent to the ground.
    10
    [4-3.
    

    -------
    The reasons for the continued use of these private disposal
    systems are twofold:
    1.	Despite heavy development in the eastern SFVB, there
    are still many isolated areas in the City of Los
    Angeles which are not served by sewers. These areas
    rely on PDS1 s as the only available means of wastewater
    disposal. Except for some fringe areas, all areas in
    the Cities of Burbank, Glendale and San Fernando have
    been sewered.
    2.	Current regulations in the City of Los Angeles do not
    provide a systematic method for requiring both the
    connection to public sewers and the abandonment of
    PDS's as new sewer facilities become available in an
    area. In addition, PDS's may not have been properly
    abandoned when businesses were connected to the public
    sewer system. The Cities of Glendale and Burbank do
    have provisions in their municipal codes that require
    properties with access to available public sewers to
    connect to those facilities within a 5-vear period and
    to backfill abandoned PDS's.
    The disposal of hazardous materials into an operating or
    improperly abandoned PDS is an attractive but unlawful
    alternative to proper waste disposal such as pickup by a licensed
    chemical waste hauler or recycler. The disposal of hazardous
    wastes to PDS's may become increasingly attractive as more
    stringent enforcement is focused on the disposal of these
    materials into sewers and sanitary landfills for domestic refuse,
    and the cost of disposal becomes increasingly expensive.
    AC present, there are no monitoring requirements for the
    periodic testing or inspection of PDS's operated on commercial
    and industrial properties. Quantitative analyses of single grab
    samples from some of the PDS's in the North Hollywood area
    revealed that effluents from the systems contained potentially
    significant concentrations of volatile organic compounds
    (averaging 6 ppm and ranging from 0.3 ppm to 23 ppm). The
    effluents from each of these systems are discharged directly to
    the ground. These analyses indicate that the PDS is a more
    significant potential source of contamination than previously
    believed.
    3.2.3 Implementation
    3.2.3.1 Recommended Actions
    The various city, county, and state agencies should
    coordinate their activities through the Interagency Advisory
    Committee to regulate and phase out PDS's in the San Fernando
    Valley. The Committee should oversee and direct the measures set
    forth in the following sections.
    11
    [4-SS
    

    -------
    A.
    Identification, Investigation and Regulation of
    Existing Private Disposal Systems
    The first phase of implementation involves the
    identification, investigation, and increased regulation of PDS's
    on commercial or industrial properties. Monitoring and testing
    of individual PDS1s may be required to determine which sites have
    the greatest potential for adverse impact on groundwater quality.
    Where applicable, these facilites should be included in existing
    regulatory programs, such as the Industrial Waste Permit program
    or the County Hazardous Waste Control Program. Provisions should
    be made for regular testing of PDS effluents to ensure the proper
    utilization of the PDS.
    B. Phaseout and Elimination of Private Disposal Systems
    The second phase of impiementacion involves the phaseout and
    elimination of existing PDS's. This recommended action is in
    substantial conformance with the recommended management policies
    of the Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles River Basin
    adopted by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board
    and the State Water Resources Control Board.
    Based on the information gathered from the first phase, a
    priority schedule for the elimination of PDS's from commercial
    and industrial properties should be established. This schedule
    should consider the following factors:
    1.	nature and quantity of hazardous wastes generated;
    2.	history of compliance with or violation of hazardous
    waste disposal regulations (e.g. presence of industrial
    wastes in PDS effluent);
    3.	availabilty of existing public sewer facilities; and
    4.	costs to construct new public sewer facilities.
    Those sites that have access to existing public sewers
    should be required to abandon their PDS's and connect to the
    sewer system if hazardous wastes are generated on the premises.
    Currently, Burbank and Glendale have provisions in their
    municipal codes that require all properties within 200 feet of
    available sewers to connect to those facilities within a 5-year
    period. Similar provisions should be included in the Los Angeles
    and San Fernando Municipal Codes to allow for enforcement of this
    action for those commercial and industrial land uses where
    hazardous wastes may be generated.
    Where no existing sewer facilities are available, new public
    sewers should be constructed to further eliminate the need for
    PDS's in those areas. The Cities of Burbank, Glendale and San
    Fernando have already instituted projects to sewer all areas
    within those cities. Except for some possible fringe areas, all
    12
    [4-ae
    

    -------
    properties appear to be connected to the public sewer system.
    Provisions for the abandonment and backfilling of the PDS upon
    connection to the sewer are also included in the plumbing codes
    for these cities.
    There are several unsewered areas in heavily developed
    commercial and industrial zones in the City of Los Angeles.
    Although there are currently no provisions to require that these
    areas be sewered, the County DOHS, together with the RWQCB, can
    order that individual sites be sewered when it is believed that
    the continued use of a PDS represents either a threat to public
    health or a significant public nuisance.
    3.2.3.2 Responsible Agencies
    Water Agency	Assist in locating PDS's by
    conducting a search of utility
    files and provide the appropriate
    agency with a listing of all
    locations in the east San Fernando
    Valley that have been exempted
    from the sewer service charge.
    Engineering Department	1.
    2.
    Review public sewer "WYE" maps,
    evaluate the area-wide wastewater
    collection network, and identify
    areas not served by public sewers.
    Plan, schedule and construct nev
    public sewer facilities in those
    ccmmercial and industrial areas
    within the sensitive groundwater
    areas of the SFVB.
    Sanitation Department	1. Conduct field investigations and
    and coordinate records search to
    identify all PDS1s operated by
    ccmmercial and industrial firms
    in the eastern San Fernando
    Valley.
    Department of Building and
    Safety, Cities cf Los Angeles
    and San Fernando
    1.
    Conduct regular inspections and
    testing at commercial and indus-
    trial sites that generate indus-
    trial wastes where a private
    disposal system is used.
    Revise files to assist in locating
    existing and improperly abandoned
    PDS's.
    13
    [4-37
    

    -------
    State and County Departments
    of Health Services, Regional
    Water Quality Cbntrol Board
    2. Recommend and pursue a revision
    to the Municipal Code to require
    mandatory connection to the
    public sewer systan and proper
    abandonment of the FDS for canmer-
    cial and industrial properties in
    areas where sewers are available.
    1.	Assist in locating unauthorized
    FDS's during field inspections.
    2.	Assist in monitoring and testing
    of FDS's on sites that generate
    hazardous wastes.
    3.	Prwide regulatory and legal
    support and guidelines for
    efforts to require construction
    of new sewers and abandonment
    of misused PDS's.
    IV.
    CITY OF LOS ANGELES PSDS LEGISLATION
    Approximately two years after the publication of Los Angeles
    Department of Water and Power's, "Groundwater Quality Management
    Plan; SFVB", local legislation regulating private sewage disposal
    systems (PSDS) was passed. In September of 1985, the City of Los
    Angeles passed Ordinance Number 160388. This ordinance amended
    the Los Angeles Municipal Code to "require the phasing-out of
    private sewage disposal systems employed by industrial,
    commercial, and multiple residential uses in the San Fernando
    Valley" (City of Los Angeles Municipal Code, Ordinance Number
    160388).
    The ordinance requires owners of industrial and commercial
    PSDS to abandon their systems and connect to public sanitary
    sewers. These requirements are in effect in areas currently
    14
    [4-88
    

    -------
    served by public sewers. All private sewage disposal systems on
    lots occupied by four or fewer residential units are exempt from
    these orders.
    Owners of PSDS who are served Notices to Connect, are
    required to comply with the order within one year. Failure to
    comply may result in the discontinuance of water service, and a
    subsequent LADWP order to vacate the building.
    Provisions under the ordinance allow persons who (1) own,
    use or maintain a PSDS and, (2) have been issued Notices to
    Connect, the right to apply for a variance from the ordinance's
    connection requirements. The Director may issue a variance if:
    1.	The ordinance requirements will result in "extreme
    hardships unessential to the overall purpose of such
    requirements", and
    2.	The continued operation of the subject PSDS will not
    have any significant adverse effect upon groundwater
    quality in the SFVB (LADWP, 1983).
    V. IMPLEMENTATION OF PSDS PHASE-OUT PROGRAM
    The City of Los Angeles' Department of Public Works began a
    phased implementation program in 1986. This program was
    instituted to ultimately eliminate the use of commercial and
    industrial PSDS in the SFVB. Measures were taken by the 3ureau
    of Sanitation to prioritize its implementation. Owners of PSDS
    which contained hazardous wastes (as designated by the City) were
    issued Notices to Connect (to existing sewer systems) first.
    Since late 1985, the Bureau of Sanitation has completed the
    following tasks:
    15
    [4-89
    

    -------
    1.	With 30 inspectors, completed a field survey of 3,039
    San Fernando Valley site addresses provided by the
    Bureau of Engineering. These addresses were industrial
    and commercial properties that did not apply for a
    sewer connection permit where a city sewer was
    available.
    2.	Compiled a list of 1,502 site addresses from the
    original survey as possible PSDS users. The remaining
    addresses were identified to be properties which did
    not have PSDS on location (i.e. parking lots, vacant
    lots) .
    3.	Mailed letters to all legal owners of the 1,502 site
    addresses informing them of the requirements of the
    recently passed Ordinance 160388.
    4.	Established a priority listing of sites in contaminated
    groundwater areas to be served Notices to Connect.
    5.	Identified 141 sites as suspected potential dischargers
    of industrial wastes. These sites were surveyed and 63
    were reported to possess industrial wastes or
    contaminants on site grounds. PSDS on these sites were
    targeted for inclusion within the waste water sampling
    program.
    6.	As of September 11, 1986, 24 of the 63 PSDS were
    sampled and analyzed for volatile organic compounds.
    PSDS waste water sampling at the remaining sites is
    currently being conducted by the Bureau of Sanitation.
    Almost all PSDS covered in the Bureau's field survey were
    identified as septic tanks with shallow wells. These wells were
    often lined, and received septic tank effluent. Because some
    septic tanks were not easily observable, a percentage of PSDS
    inspected were assumed to have these tanks. Cesspools (sewage
    wells without septic tanks) may have actually served some
    facilities.
    Waste water samples were collected from on-site PSDS at one
    of several accessible sampling points. Samples were directly
    withdrawn by the Bureau of Sanitation from septic tanks when they
    16
    [4-90
    

    -------
    were accessible. Samples were also collected from the discharge
    pipe outlet located inside the sewage disposal well-
    Table 1 presents information obtained from the industrial
    survey and sampling program (tasks 5 & 6 above). Results are
    reported for specific industrial categories. Attempts to reveal
    contamination trends with respect to industrial categories may
    aid the Bureau of Sanitation in targeting additional sites to be
    sampled in the SFVB area.
    Of the 24 PSDS sites sampled, 7 were found to contain
    quantifiable amounts of volatile organic chemicals. Owners of
    these sites have been issued Notices of Violation to pump out
    their sewage disposal wells. (letter from D. 3iagi, Director of
    the Bureau of Sanitation, to R. Ghirelli of the LARWQCB [Los
    Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board], September, 1986).
    Table 2 contains a summary of the VOC analyses for those 7
    sites found to be contaminated. As is evident from the cable,
    the majority of contaminants detected were aromatic hydrocarbons
    and chlorinated olefins.
    As mentioned previously, the Bureau of Sanitation is
    currently sampling the remaining sites identified to have
    industrial wastes or contaminants on facility grounds. All
    remaining sites will be similarly sampled for the presence of VOC
    compounds.
    17
    [4-"9
    

    -------
    IC
    NO.
    002
    006
    020
    039
    059
    068
    069
    071
    075
    106
    112
    123
    TABLE 1
    SUMMARY OF PSDS INDUSTRIAL WASTE SURVEY
    AS OF SEPTEM3ER 11, 1986
    INDUSTRIAL
    CATEGORY
    NO. OF
    SITES DATE OF
    SURVEY LD SURVEY
    AjrcraFt Mfg. Serv.	4
    & Maintenance
    Auco Mfg. Serv.	44
    & Maintenance
    Cleaners & Dryers	1
    Film Processing	3
    Jewelry-Repair &	1
    Cleaning
    Laurdry-Self-Serv.	1
    Laundry-Linen & Genl.	1
    Liquid Waste & Disp.	1
    M?tal Fabrication	22
    ft" inting-Type
    Setting
    Sexvice Stations
    7/17/86
    7/16 -
    7/24/86
    7/17/86
    7/24/86
    7/3 6/86
    7/22/86
    7/23/86
    7/23/86
    7/16 -
    7/22/86
    7/23/86
    7/16 -
    7/24/86
    SITES WIHI
    INDUSTRIAL
    CONTAMINANTS
    ON SITE GROUNDS
    WITHOUT Willi
    23
    1
    1
    21
    2
    1
    1
    1
    13
    NO. OF
    SITES
    SAMPLED
    RESULTS OF
    ANALYSIS
    NO VIOLATION VIOLATION
    Tire Servicing
    7/21/86
    

    -------
    TABLE 1.
    continued
    JC TMXJS-IWIAL
    NO. CA'ITGQRY
    030 Concrete Products
    NO. OF
    SITES DATE OF
    SURVEYED SURVEY
    7/17/ -
    7/24/86
    125 Truck Repair &	3	7/17 -
    Service	7/24/86
    020 Private Building	27	7/17 -
    7/24/86
    014 Beverage Mfg.	1	7/24/86
    095	Pa ml Rancwer Mfg.	2	7/24/86
    £. Service
    096	Paint Spray Booths	3	7/17/86
    097	Paper Products	1	7/22/86
    056 Hospital	1	7/16/86
    072 Limber Treating	1	7/21/86
    130 Sdniiariun	1	7/21/86
    104 Print mg-Sj] k Soeen	1	7/22/86
    054 Grinding & Disposal	1	7/21/86
    111 School	1	7/24/86
    011 Dar	1	7/25/86
    SITES WITH
    INDUSTRIAL
    OQm'AMTNAf/rS
    ON SITE GROUNDS
    wrjiiauT wiui
    3	1
    25
    A
    I
    to
    2 OF 3
    NO. OF
    SITES	RESULTS OF	ENFORCEMENT
    SAMPLED	ANALYSIS	ACTION
    NO VIOLATION VIOLATION
    N. O. V.
    1
    1
    

    -------
    TABLE 1.
    continued
    IC
    NO.
    INDUSTRIAL
    CATEGORY
    NO. OF
    SITES DATE OF
    SURVEYED SURVEY
    SITES WITH
    INDUSTRIAL
    cmrAwiNAwrs
    ON SITE GROUNDS
    WITHOUT WITH
    026 Cherrucal Packaging
    060 Laboratory _
    Analytical
    019 Bus Repair &
    Servicing
    085 OlI - Mfg. Drilling
    7/17/86
    7/17/06
    7/17/86
    7/17/86
    TOTALS
    ] 41
    78
    63
    N. 0. V. = Notice of Violation
    a
    i
    to
    3 OF 3
    NO. OF
    SITES	RESULTS OF	ENFORCEMENT
    SAMPLED	ANALYSIS	ACTION
    NO VIOLATION VIOLATION
    1	1
    1	1
    1	1	N. O. V.
    24
    17
    7
    

    -------
    TABLE 2
    1 OF 1
    PSDS INEQSTRIAL WASTE SURVEY
    SUMMARY OF VCLAHLE ORGANIC CHEMICAL (VOC)
    ANALYSES PCR CCNTAM1NKEED INDUSTRIAL SITES
    DATE
    LAB NO. OWNER/TENANT	DATE	ANALYSIS QUANTIFIED	CCNCEHTRATICN
    SITE ADDRESS	SAMPLED REPORTED	VOC	(PEW)
    130 Colunbia Showcase	8/15/86
    and Cabinet Ccmpany
    Cesspool #2
    11034 Sherman Way
    North Hollywood, CA
    132 Columbia Showcase	8/15/86
    and Cabinet Ccmpany
    Cesspool if3
    11034 Sherman Way
    North Hollywood, CA
    9/8/86 Toluene	0.23
    P-Xylene	0.03
    O-Xvlene	0.02
    9/8/86 Toluene	85.1
    Ethyl 3enzene	0.07
    P-Xylene	1.32
    0-Xylene	0.01
    1-Methvl-4-Benzene	Trace
    135 Medal Tire Co. Inc. 8/15/86	9/8/86
    13123 Sherman Way
    North Hollywood, CA
    144 Chapnan Studio	8/18/86	9/8/86
    Equip. Co.
    12950 Razmer Street
    North Hollywood, CA
    125 3ug Castle	8/14/86	9/8/86
    12039 Branford
    Sun Valley, CA
    133 McKinzie1s Automotive 8/15/86 9/8/86
    12945 Sherman Way
    Cesspool -2
    North Hollywood, CA
    Toluene	0.05
    Non-prioricv org. Trace
    Methylene Chloride	12.0
    TCA	0.04
    ?CE	0.01
    TCE	0.03
    Non-prioriry org.	Trace
    Toluene	0.02
    P-Xylene	0.05
    0-Xvlene	0.06
    Mon-prionty	org. Trac=
    134 McKinzie1 s Automotive
    Inc.
    12945 Sherman Way
    Cesspool w/o building
    North Hollywood, CA
    8/15/86
    9/8/86
    1,2-Dichloro
    3enzene
    0.06
    137 R & R Four Slide Corp.
    12957 Sherman Way
    North Hollywood, CA
    8/15/86
    9/8/86
    P-Xylene
    1,2-DCE
    0.01
    Trace
    155 Remo Inc.
    12804 Rayner St.
    North Hollywood,
    CA
    8/18/86
    9/8/86
    TCE
    Toluene
    1,2-Dichloro
    Benzene
    0.02
    0.02
    0.05
    [4-95
    

    -------
    VI. ASSESSMENT
    Sampling programs have provided evidence that industrial and
    commercial PSDS continue to pose a high contamination potential
    to SFVB groundwater. Most contaminated groundwater supply wells
    have been found in industrially zoned areas. A number of
    industrial septic systems were also found to discharge waste
    water effluent containing industrial chemicals. TCE
    contamination in the Basin has been attributed to disposal
    practices dating 20 to 30 years ago. PSDS, however, continue to
    discharge a variety of other contaminants to the subsurface.
    The San Fernando Valley Basin is one of a growing number of
    groundwater aquifers which has been contaminated by industrial
    PSDS. Research conducted nationally indicates that primary
    sewage disposal systems (i.e. septic tank systems) are limited
    with respect to their treatment capacities. Field sampling
    programs and research have shown that:
    (1)	Septic systems remove little, if any, organic chemicals.
    The scum layer residing within the tank inhibits the volati-
    lization of organic solvents.
    (2)	Subsurface soil absorption systems (i.e. wells, drain
    fields) do not provide adequate treatment of industrial
    waste streams. Past experience has shown that soils cannot
    adequately adsorb many of the organic compounds found in
    industrial waste discharges (US EPA Office of Groundwater
    Protection, 1986).
    18
    [4-9e
    

    -------
    Concerns regarding
    systems operating
    substantiated.
    the continued threat of
    within the SFVB are,
    industrial septic
    therefore, well
    The City of Los Angeles has adopted an aggressive program
    designed to eliminate future groundwater contamination resulting
    from PSDS. Rather than implementing a general permitting program
    consisting of effluent and groundwater monitoring, the City has
    committed itself to constructing sanitary sewers in the affected
    industrial districts. Ultimately, all industrial sewage waste
    waters in the Eastern San Fernando Valley (L.A. County) will be
    collected by sanitary sewer collection systems. The sewer
    construction program is projected to span a decade ac an annual
    cost of $1,000,000 (LADWP, 1983).
    Other cities considering similar PSDS phase-out programs
    should examine LADWP's recommendations. LADWP1 s Recommendation #2
    represents a well organized regulatory guideline. This guideline
    discusses general considerations which should be addressed when
    developing a prioritized schedule for the elimination of
    commercial and industrial PSDS. Tasks performed by the City of
    Los Angeles' Department of Public Works should also be
    scrutinized. Methods used by the department to identify, survey,
    and sample industrial PSDS should aid other regulatory agencies
    who plan to implement similar prioritized programs.
    19
    [4-97
    

    -------
    Probable Class V well types operating in the San Fernando
    Valley are:
    -	Septic Systems (Well Disposal Method), 5W31
    -	Industrial Process Water and Waste Disposal Wells, 5W20
    -	Cesspools, 5W10
    Industrial or commercial PSDS which were shown to contain
    industrial waste contaminants are essentially industrial waste
    disposal (type 5W-20) wells. Chemicals identified in these PSDS
    are listed as hazardous substances in 40 CFR Part 261 Subpart D.
    These wells, therefore, may be reclassified as Class IV Wells by
    EPA Region IX. PSDS not identified as industrial waste
    discharges cannot positively be classified as Class V wells based
    on currently available information. Field surveys conducted by
    the Bureau of Sanitation did not include PSDS flow rate
    information. These wells, therefore, may not meet minimum
    disposal rate requirements for Class V Wells (which must serve at
    least 20 persons per day.) (1500 gpd is judged here to be an
    indicative flow rate for systems serving 20 persons per day).
    Additional flow rate information must be assimilated before these
    wells can be included within the CJIC Class V Well inventory.
    This deserves further attention from EPA Region IX.
    Groundwater testing data obtained from the SFVB reaffirm
    concerns that commercial and industrial PSDS pose a nigh
    pollution threat to USDW's Aquifers across the nation. The City
    of Los Angeles, recognizing the threat posed by PSDS in the
    Valley, has expedited legislation and regulatory programs to
    protect the SFVB from future contamination from these sources.
    Other California cities with unsewered industrial districts
    20
    [4-98
    

    -------
    overlying groundwater aquifers should cake heed of the SFVB
    groundwater quality findings. Groundwater monitoring programs
    should be established throughout these areas to measure the
    impact of industrial and commercial PSDS on regional
    groundwaters.
    21
    [4-9£
    

    -------
    Section 4.3
    Sewage Treatment Plant Disposal Wells Supporting Data
    [4-100
    

    -------
    SECTION 4.3.1
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (or SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    AUTHOR:
    (OR INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION:
    Deep-Well Artificial Recharge
    Experiments at Bay Park, Long
    Island, New York, Geological
    Survey Professional Papers 751-A
    through 751-F
    United States Geological Survey,
    and Nassau County Department of
    Public Works
    Bay Park Artificial Recharge
    Plant, Bay Park, Long Island, NY,
    USEPA Region II
    1972
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:	Sewage treatment plant and aquifer
    recharge facility.
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES: Title pages and abstracts of the following
    USGS reports are included:
    751-A "Preliminary Results of Injecting Highly Treated Sewage-
    Plant Effluent into a Deep Sand Aquifer at Bay Park, New
    York" by John Vecchioli and Henry F.H. Ku
    751-B "Design and Operation of the Artificial-Recharge Plant at
    Bay Park, New York" by Ellis Koch, Anthony A. Giaimo, and
    Dennis J. Sulam
    751-C "Geohydrology of the Artificial-Research Site at Bay Park,
    Long Island, New York" by John Vecchioli, G.D. Bennett,
    F.J. Pearson, Jr., and L.A. Cerrillo
    751-D "Geochemica] Effects of Recharging the Magothy Aquifer,
    Bay Park, New York, with Tertiary-Treated Sewage" by
    Stephen E. Ragone
    751-E "Microbiological Effects of Recharging the Magothy
    Aquifer, Bay Park, New York, with Tertiary-Treated Sewage"
    by Gary G. Erlich, Henry F.H. Ku, John Vecchioli, and
    Theodore A. Ehlke
    751-F "Hydraulic Effects of Recharging the Magothy Aquifer, Bay
    Park, New York, with Tertiary-Treated Sewage" by John
    Vecchioli, Henry F.H. Ku, and Dennis J. Sulam
    [4-10-
    

    -------
    A10104 254 735
    Preliminary Results of
    Injecting Highly Treated
    Sewage-Plant Effluent
    Into a Deep Sand Aquifer at
    Bay Park, New York
    By JOHN VECCHIOLI and HENRY F. H. KU
    DEEP -WELL ARTIFICIAL RECHARGE EXPERIMENTS
    AT BAY PARK, LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK
    GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 7 5 I - A
    Prepared in cooperation with the Nassau County
    Department of Public Works
    UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. WASHINGTON 19712
    [4-1ff2
    

    -------
    DEEP-WELL ARTIFICIAL RECHARGE EXPERIMENTS AT
    BAY °ARK, LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK
    PRELIMINARY RESULTS OF INJECTING HIGHLY
    TREATED SEWAGE-PLANT EFFLUENT INTO A
    DEEP SAND AQUIFER AT BAY PARK, NEW YORK
    By John Vecchiou and Hlnry F. H. Ku
    ABSTRACT
    Highly treated sewage-plant effluent 13 being injected into a sand
    aquifer at Bay Park, N.Y. Recharge 13 through a fiberglass-cased
    well finished with a gravel-packed 16-inch diameter stain less-steel
    screen set between -113 and 480 feet below land surface. The veil is
    open to the Magothy aquifer of Late Cretaceous age. Maximum
    recharge rate thus far is 360 gallons per minute.
    Head buildup in the injection well (but not the aquifer) in each
    injection test has exceeded that predicted by pumping-tesc data
    even though the water injected had a physical and chemical quality
    acceptable for drinking water. In one test, the specific capacity of
    the injection well was reduced to hall the preinjection value after
    10 days of injection. Excessive head buildup is strongly dependent
    upon the turbidity of the recharge water, even though turbidity
    levels are generally less than 2 milligrams per liter as SiOt. The
    fine-grained nature of the aquifer probably accounts for the well's
    high sensitivity to small amounts of suspended matter.
    Redevelopment by pumping after each injection test has resulted
    in restoration of most of the specific capacity prevailing prior to
    each test. The rirst slug of water recovered during redevelopment
    is very turbid and the concentrations of iron, phosphate, and
    volatile solids are many times greater than those of the injected
    water. Bacterial content is also many times greater and this to-
    gether with other evidence suggests that some deterioration in well
    capacity may be a result of biologic clogging.
    INTRODUCTION
    PURPOSE A>D SCOPE
    Nassau County is a highly urbanized area on Long
    Island adjacent to New York City (fig. 1). Its popula-
    tion has grown from 672,765 in 1950 to almost 1.5
    million in 1965 (Peters and Rose, 1968. p. 627). With
    the growth of population has come a steady increase
    in ground-water pumpage for public supply—to nearly
    210 mgd (million gallons per day) in 1965 (Cohen and
    others, 1968, p. 70). Pumpage is expected to be almost
    300 mgd by 2010 (Peters and Rose, 1968, p. 627). Local
    ground water presently is the only source of public-
    supply water, with most of the water being obtained
    from the Magothy aquifer of Late Cretaceous age.
    Intensive net withdrawals from that aquifer have
    7i'
    72'
    1 =
    •II'
    V'l.
    -y
    
    f««no
    > a
    I a
    V
    
    SOL'
    sD
    |;UA'
    
    Wym 1 ujnQ • ¦»
    — y
    Sltwtw _	iW*nO
    tO-N°
    -A.*	; -
    <*nni(un imao.
    . the	^ -
    ' \
    -.y~-	NASSAU \
    ftl gUEENS rri fiviTV .
    ^ SUFFOLK COUNTY 0	~
    N	- -
    \ s 1 -
    • J [.' QUEENS	COUNTY , m G
    jjL> \ county /	o , -u.—;
    »^Sew Yor* City	U ~- y .
    J	 >	B.y P*rk^rr
    • " .J' KINGS r \2-S~		
    
    o^aira Hmutt
    FIGURE 1.—Location of Bay Park injection site.
    -v"
    0*>
    :o vi l£3
    A1
    [4-103
    

    -------
    A10104 254724
    Design and Operation of the
    Artificial-Recharge Plant at
    Bay Park, New York
    By ELLIS KOCH, ANTHONY A. GIAIMO, and DENNIS J. SULAM
    DEEP-WELL ARTIFICIAL-RECHARGE EXPERIMENTS AT BAY PARK.
    LONG ISLAND. NEW YORK
    GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 751-B
    Prepared in cooperation with the
    Nassau County Department of
    Public Works
    UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON
    [4-10 c
    

    -------
    DEEP-WELL artificial-recharge experiments
    at BAY park, long island. NEW YORK
    DESIGN AND OPERATION OF THE
    ARTIFICIAL-RECHARGE PLANT AT BAY PARK. NEW YORK
    Bv Elus Koch, Anthony A. Giaimo, and Dennis J. Sllam
    ABSTRACT
    The Bay Park irtiScial-recharire plant, in south-western
    Nassau County. is an extensively instrumented facility ad-
    jacent to a 60-mtihon j*alIon-per-day sewag-e-trearment plant.
    The facility was constructed to inject reclaimed water
    (sei*a>te-pUnt effluent that ha* been fin en tertiary treat-
    ment! into a deep well in the Magothy aquifer and to mon-
    itor hydraulic and geochemical effects of that water on the
    aquifer, the major source of water for Nassau County. An
    array of observation wells permtU monitoring those effects
    at distances up to 200 feet from the injection well, tfajor
    components of the facility include (a I a 50.000-gallon stor-
    age tank, fb> a vacuum degasifier. (c> pumping and con-
    trolling1 equipment for maintaining injection either at a
    constant rate or under a constant head, (dl flow-rate and
    water-quality monitoring and recording equipment, (e) a
    490-footJeep injection well, if) an arrav of observation wells,
    and Iff) pumpintr equipment for testing and redeveloping
    the injection well.
    Effluent can be injected at rates as much as 400 gallons
    per minute and the injection well can be redeveloped at rates
    a3 much as I 000 gallons per minute
    Casines of the injection well and of most of the observation
    wells are made of fiber-class-remtorced epoxy pipe. One of
    the well screens is made of slotted fiber-fflas3-remforced
    epoty pipe the others are made of stainless steel Associated
    pipin? and tanks are made either of polyvinyl chloride or of
    steel coated with chemically stable materials, such as epoxy
    or coal-tar enamel. These materials were selected to min-
    imize corrosion of ranks, pipes nnd screens expo«ed to re-
    claimed water or to chemical solutions used in redevelopment
    of the injection well.
    The chemical character of the water to be injected can
    be changed by the addition of chemicals at the storage tank's
    inlet or outlet and by the deerasjfication process Automatic
    sensors continuously monitor injection water repumped
    water, or water from observation e*Ia for Temperature,
    turbidity, ipectfic conductance. pH. Eh and dissoUed-oxvgen
    and residual-chlorine contents in addition, periodic calibra-
    tion of the automatic sensors as «ell as some chemical and
    bacteriological analyses can be made in a small laboratory
    at the site
    INTRODUCTION
    PURPOSE \ND 5COPE
    The Bay Park artificial-recharge study was begun
    in 1964 as part of a cooperative program of water-
    resources investigations by the U.S. Geological Sur-
    vey and the Nassau County Department of Public
    Works. The study involves experimental injection of
    reclaimed water (sewage-plant effluent that has been
    given tertiary treatment) into a 490-foot-deep well
    in the Magothy aquifer. The recharge facility is in
    southwestern Nassau County (fig. 1), in the Village
    of East Rockaway, on the property of the Bay Park
    sewage-treatment plant.
    The Bay Park sewage-treatment plant is the acti-
    vated-sludge type. It has a design capacity of 50 mgd
    (million gallons per day) About 0 6 mgd of the ef-
    fluent from this plant is diverted to a pilot plant,
    where it recenes tertian* treatment. There the ef-
    fluent is clarified, filtered, first through sand-an-
    thranlt beds and then through beds of activated
    carbon; and chlorinated. About -125.000 gallons of
    the treated tjtfluent from the pilot plant freclaimed
    water) is then piped to the recharge facility (tig. 2)
    This report, one of a series on the experimental
    results at Bay Park, describes the design and the
    operation of the recharge plant.
    PJtEMOlS WORK
    Several reports on the Bay Park facility and its
    operation have been published. Cohen and Durfor
    (1966) described the iniection well in detail. In a
    subsequent report, Cohen and Durfor (1967) listed
    the objectives of the recharge study and described
    Bi
    [4-105
    

    -------
    A1Q10M 2S470a
    Geohydrology of the
    Artificial-Recharge Site at
    Bay Park, Long Island, New York
    By JOHN VECCHIOLI, G. D. BENNETT, F. J. PEARSON, JR.,
    and L. A. CERRILLO
    DEEP-WELL ARTIFICIAL-RECHARGE EXPERIMENTS
    AT BAY PARK, LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK
    GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 7 5 1 — C
    UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON 1974
    Prepared in cooperation with the
    Nassau County Department of
    Public Works
    [4-106
    

    -------
    DEEP-HELL ARTIFICIAL-RECHARGE EXPERIMENTS AT BAY PARK, LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK
    GEOHYDROLOGY OF THE ARTIFICIAL-RECHAHGE SITE
    AT BAY PARK, LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK
    John Vecchioli. Gordon D Benvett, Frederick, J Pe\r>*os. Jr..
    and Lawrence A. Cejuuuo
    ABSTRACT
    Reclaimed water (hiehly treated sewape-plant effluent) is
    bemg- injected into a -180-foot-deep well at Bay Park, Lonir
    Island. N.Y . as part of a cooperative experimental study by
    the U S. Geological Survey and the Nassau County Depart-
    ment of PjdIic Works Befoie the revnarce expenments were
    started, the local freolocy. well and aquifer hydraulic, and
    chemistry of the native water were =tudied to define the
    background JU'amst wnicn to nea>ure the etfec'.a of mat-
    ing the reclaimed water Results ol these .studies are pre-
    sented in this report.
    The recharge well is screened in the lower part of the
    Magothy aquifer of Lute Cretaceous age. Because the Mairo-
    thy, the principal source of ground water in most of Lone
    Island, is hydraulicaily interconnected with bodies of salt}
    surface water, salt-water encroachment is a sfreat concern.
    A search for methods with which to maraee this problem
    prompted the cooperative study of recnarinnc the aquifer
    with reclaimeu water At Bay Park, the Mairothy iciuifer
    is conrincu oelow by the day member of the Raman Fumia-
    tion, also of Late Cietaceuus aire The aquifer is largelv un-
    confined dOO\e. imint* to the generally coarse-mained te\tuie
    of the uverlvinp Pleistocene deposits The injection zone is a
    *>0-foot interval af slightly silty fine to medium sard beds
    that lie between .Mairuthy beds of lower hvdraulic conuuc-
    tivity Average lateral hydraulic conductivity of the strati-
    fied tiO-toot injection ione is estimated to be 'J-10 gallons per
    day per square foot (llJG feet per day), but flowmeter sut-
    veys indicate considei able variation in latetal hvdraulic
    conductivity within this interval. Yertic.il hydraulic oon-
    ductmtv 01 the niateual between the water table and :he
    top of the injection zone ranges irom 1 to .'0 gallons per dav
    per .-square toot (1)27 to J.7 feet per day) The livdiaulic
    charnctet istics of the hvdroloirc system were determined by
    standard aquifer-test methods and were later verified by
    electric-analoc studies
    Water from the Macothv aquifer has an unusuallv low
    dissolved-solids content because of the lack of readilv solu-
    ble minerals in tne aquifer deposits At Bay Park, the
    di»sohed-=olids content is about J5 milligram? per liter
    Most of the specific chemical components aie choae pieseiu
    in precipitation, the source of natural recharpe. Dissolved
    silica, the single most abundant dissolved constituent in
    water from the Magothy aquifer, results from the solution
    of quai tz. the dominant mineral in the sand tnac constitutes
    most of the aquifer,
    INTRODUCTION
    PURPOSE AND SCOPE
    The L'.S Geological Sur.ey in cooperation with
    the Nassau County Department of Public Works is
    continuing a study of hydrologic and geochemical
    problems connected with injection of reclaimed wa-
    ter into a deep weil at Bay Park. Long Island, N.Y.
    Although this work is part of a larger study to
    evaluate the feasibility of the use of barrier re-
    charge wells to prevent salt-water encroachment,
    the work us not concerned with the effect of recharge
    on the salt-water front. Rather, it is restricted to
    a study of the mechanics of the recharge process
    Pilot-plant experimentation is underway at the Nas-
    sau County sewage-treatment plant in Bay Park,
    Long Island, N'.Y. Bay Park, on the northern shore
    of Hewlett Bay in southwestern Nassau County (hg.
    1), is about 3 miles north of the southern shore of
    Lonir Island.
    Early work in the project included conitruction
    of the experimental recharge well and a icncs of
    observation wells, installation ot injection equip-
    ment. and instrumentation of observation ue!N ami
    niieitmn equipment. Lnhoiot:ii; core ->amples collect-
    ed iturni'^ drilling ot the wells and geophvMuil lovrs
    of the wells were studied to derine the hydroireolocic
    framework at the recharge site. Acuuter test.s were
    made to determine the hydraulics of the wells and
    the aquifer The.se tests were later iiipplemeiited
    with electriL-analoir studies Hydrochemical studies
    were made to define the geochemical environment oi
    the aquifer. This report presents the results of geo-
    logic. hydrologic, and hydrochemical studies that
    Cl
    [4-107
    

    -------
    A1Q1Q14 5S4bT3
    Geochemical Effects of Recharging
    the Magothy Aquifer,
    Bay Park, New York,
    With Tertiary-Treated Sewage
    By STEPHEN E. RAGONE
    DEEP-WELL ARTIFICIAL - RECHARGE EXPERIMENTS
    AT BAY PARK, LONG ISLAND. N E W YORK
    GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 7 5 I - D
    Prepared, m cooperation with the
    Nassau County Department of
    Public Works
    UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. WASHINGTON 1977
    [4-103]
    

    -------
    DEEP-WELL ARTIFICIAL-RECHARGE EXPERIMENTS AT BAY P \RK. LONG ISLAND NEW ^ ORk
    GEOCHEMICAL EFFECTS OF RECHARGING THE MAGOTHY AQUIFER,
    BAY PARK, NEW YORK, WITH TERTIARY -TREATED SEWAGE
    Bv Stephen E. Ragone
    \BSTRACT
    A ground-water deficit of 93 5 to 123 million gallons per dav (4 I0to5 39
    cubic meters per vecond) has been predicted for Nassau Countv. N Y . bv
    the tear 2000 in a Suite report. Became of the predicted deficit, the U S
    Geological Surrey, in cooperation with (he Nassau Cuunt\ Department of
    Public Works, began an c*pertmental deep-well recharge program in 1968
    Thirteen recharge tests using tertian-treated sewage I reclaimed water) and
    ii\ mis using water trom the domestic suppls (cm water) were completed
    between I9WJ and 1473 Recharge was through an 18-inch 146-centimeter)
    diameter recharge well tcrcened in the Magottn aquifer between depths ol
    4lg and 4X0 leet 1127 and l-W> meters! below land surtace Recharge rales
    ringed Irom about 20U to 400 gallons per minute 113 to 23 liters per sec-
    ond). I n the longest lest, reclaimed water was injected during 84 J days of a
    199-dav period.
    Although the iron concentration oi native water in the rechanje zone
    and of reclaimed water is leu than Oj milligrams per liter, the iron
    concentration of samples collected from observation welts 20. 100. and
    200 feet to 1.30. andbl meters) from the recharge well.and screrned in the
    zone of recharge. approached 3 milligrams per liter at times Iron mass-
    balanie ^en in the rrclaimed water oxidues pwur
    and rrleaics Kr*; ifrmrus iron) to solution. Howeser. the amount of iron
    in water <rd pH to decrease bv more than 1 pH unit
    Ternarv trratmetii rrmmrs 90 to 98 percent of the phosphate. MBA.S
    (methylene blue active substances), and COO (chemical oxi^en
    demand), leasing an ateraqe of 0 17. 0.07. and 9 milligrams per liter,
    respectuelv During recharge. phosphate concentrations remain at
    naiive-watrr lrNrlsaiihr20-, 100- and200-foottb 1- 30-.andhl-meieri
    observation wells. which indicates phosphate retention bv the aquifer
    Some MB Vbjnd COD are retained at the 100- and 200-foot OO-andbl-
    meteri weils. presumablv bv adsorption reactions
    INTRODUCTION
    Population of Nassau Countv. Long Island. N.Y. (fig.
    1) increased from 0.41 million in 1940 to 1.43 million in
    1970 and is expected io mcrese to between 1.63 and 1.85
    million bv the year 2000 (Temporary State Commission on
    the Water-Supplv Needs of Southeastern New York, 1972).
    As a result of population increase, gross pumpage from
    the ground-water svstem, the only source of public water
    supplv to date (1977). has increased from 75 Mgal/d (3.29
    mVs) in 1940 to 215 Mgal/d (9.42 mJ/s) in 1970. Gross
    pumpage is expected to range from 258 to 313 Mgal/ d (11.3
    to 13.7 mJs) bv the vear 2000(Temporary State Commis-
    sion on the Water-Supplv Needs of Southeastern New
    York, 1972). The increased demand for water—together
    with decreased recharge resulting from the replacement of
    cesspools and septic tanks, which return effluents to the
    ground, with sewer svstems, which discharge effluents
    offshore—is predicted to cause a water deficit m Nassau
    Countv of 93.5 to 123 Mgal/d(4.10to5.39m1/s)bv the vear
    2000 (Temporary State Commission on the Water-Supplv
    Needs of Southeastern New York. 1972).
    PI RPObE AND SCOPE
    This report summarizes the geochemical effects of
    injecung reclaimed water (tertiarv-ireated sewage) into a
    sand aquifer. Because of the very good chemical quality of
    the native water, as reflected bv a dissolved-solids concen-
    tration of 22 to 25 mg/1 (milligrams per liter), it was nec-
    essary to determine the tvpc and extent of anv chemical
    reaction caused bv artificial recharge that could lead to a
    degradauon of water quality. The study began in 1964 and
    was completed in 1973 as part of a cooperative water-re-
    sources program between the U S. Geological Survey and
    the Nassau Countv Department of Public Works. Thirteen
    i)i
    [4-109
    

    -------
    A10104 2S474Q
    Microbiological Effects of Recharging
    the Magothy Aquifer,
    Bay Park, New York,
    With Tertiary-Treated Sewage
    B\ GARRY G. EHRLICH, HENRY F. H. KU, JOHN VECCHIOLI, and THEODORE
    A. EHLKE
    DEEP-WELL ARTIFICIAL RECHARGE EXPERIMENTS
    AT BAY PARK, LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK
    GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 7 5 I - E
    Prepared in cooperation with the
    Nassau County Department
    of Public Works
    UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. WASHINGTON 1979
    [4-1T0
    

    -------
    DEEP-WELL ARTIFICIAL RECHARCE EXPERIMENTS AT BA\ P\RK. LO\C ISLAND. NEW YORK
    MICROBIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF RECHARGING THE MAGOTHY
    AQUIFER, BAY PARK, NEW YORK, WITH TERTIARY-TREATED
    SEWAGE
    Bv Garr\ G Ehruch. Henry F H. Kc. John Vecchioli. and Theodore A. Ehlke
    ABSTRACT	I
    Injection or hignlv treated sewage (reclaimed water) into a sand [
    aquifer on Long Island N' Y . stimulated microbiai growth near the i
    well screen Chlonnation of the tnjeitant to 2 5 milligram!, per liter j
    suppressed microbial growth to the extent that it did nm contribute |
    signtfkantlv to head buildup during injection In the absence of thlor- :
    ine miirxoiai ernvvth cauvni extensive well clogging in a zone imme-
    diately adjacent :o the well screen	<
    During a resting penod ol ^evera! t'onrable substanies nut completely filtered out ui the injectam
    by the aquifer materials
    Movement of bacteria ln>m the injection well into the aiiuiier was not
    extensive In one test in whuh injeited water had substantial total- 1
    coliform fecal-colLform and fecal-streptococcal densities no fecal-coli-
    form or lecaJ-streptococcal bacteria. and onlv nominal '.otal-ioliform
    bacteria were found in water rmm an oosen ation well 21) leet iram tne
    point ot injection
    INTRODUCTION	j
    Continuing poouiation growth in Nassau County, a ¦
    suburb of New York City, has been accompanied by in-
    creased withdrawals of ground water, the only source of ¦
    public-supply water for the area.	!
    Net withdrawals from the ground-water system have j
    resulted in declining ground-w ater levels and decreased
    streamflow (Franke. 1968) and in local landward move-
    ment of aalty ground water (Lusczvnski and Swarzenski. j
    1966: Cohen and Kimmel. 1970). Net withdrawals are ex- j
    pected to increase with the rising population, per-capita .
    water use. and percentage of population served by sew- .
    ers. These growth factors indicate a water-supply deficit !
    of between 71 i and 91 1 Mgai/d by 1990 (Temporary
    State Commission on Water Supply Needs of Southeast- '
    ern New York. 1972. p 142-144).
    PURPOSE AND SCOPE
    Artificial recharge of the ground-water reservoir with
    water reclaimed from sewage is one of several altema- ;
    tives under examination by Nassau County to meet the
    anticipated water-supply deficit (Peters and Rose. 1968)
    From 1968 to 1973. the Nassau County Department of
    Public Works operated a pilot advanced w aste-treatment
    plant at Bay Park. N. Y.. near the south shore of Nassau
    County (fig 1). Reclaimed water from this plant was
    used in a series of 13 deep-well artificial-recharge exper-
    iments macie b\ the U S Geological Survey, in coopera-
    tion with the Nassau County Department of Public
    Works, to provide some of the scientific and engineering
    data needed to evaluate (I) the degree and causes of well
    clogging that resulted from injection of reclaimed water,
    and remedies for the clogging, and (2) the geochemical
    compatibility of the reclaimed water with the aquifer.
    This report, the fifth chapter in Professional Paper
    751. "Deep-Well Artificial-Recharge Experiments at Bay
    Parx. Long Island. New York." summarizes the results
    of microbiological investigations earned out during thoae
    tests. The geochemical aspects of injection of reclaimed
    water are descr.oed in the previous chapter (Ragone.
    1977).
    Microbial actiut} associated with artificial recharge
    may have three principal eifects: (1) bacteria may grow
    near the well screen and cause a gradual reduction of
    aquifer hydraulic conductivity in the immediate vicinity
    of the well: (2) microbial activity may produce substances
    that adversely affect the taste and odor of injected water
    later recovered from the aquifer: anil t3) pathogenic or-
    ganisms in the injected water may travel through the
    aquifer and cause illness when the water is later re-
    covered for domestic use
    WATER-RECLAMATION AND ARTIFICIAL-RECHARCE
    FACILITIES
    Reclaimed water for injection was obtained by ter-
    tiary-stage treatment of 0.6 Mgal/d of effluent from an
    activated-sludge-type. 60-Mgal/d sewage-treatment plant
    (Peters and Rose. 1968: Peters. 1968: Vecchioli. Oliva.
    Ragone. and Ku. 1975) This treatment consisted of (1)
    coagulation and sedimentation. (2) primary nitration
    El
    [4-11T]
    

    -------
    Hydraulic Effects of Recharging the
    Magothy Aquifer, Bay Park, New York,
    With Tertiary-Treated Sewage
    GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 7 3 I - F
    

    -------
    DEEI'-U ELL \R I ll'KJ \LRE(.H \RGE EXPERIMENTS \1 Q V\ l»\RK. l.ONC ISLAND. NEW \ORK.
    HYDRAULIC EFFECTS OF RECHARGI.NG THE MAGOTHY AQUIFER.
    BAY PARK. NEW YORK. WITH TERTIARY-TREATED SEWAGE
    Bv John Vec niiuu. Hemo F H. K.i . and De.nms J. Sllam
    \BSTR\CT
    r-opi !'"i.S :i> I'.'T I cater :rum ,>utiic -uppi> anil water
    reclaimed from sewaire were used in a aeries of l'J artificial-
    recharge experiments at Bay Park. N'.Y. Recharge to the
    Maeothy aquifer wja through a nberrfass-cased well with a
    16-inch--munth period. Durtne the ri-month test, a
    total of 42 million irallons of water was injected. In some
    tests, selected treatments were applied to the injectant to
    evaluate their effects on well cloircinir and to determine
    whether they caused ireochemical reactions within the aquifer
    After each test the injected water was pumped out of the
    aqui fer
    The recharce well and contiguous parts of the aquifer de-
    veloped varcini; tleirrees of cloifirinu. which resulted in exces-
    sive head buildup in the recharue well. Maximum reduction
    in specific capacity from 23..S to 2.5 gallons per minute per
    foot occurred during injection of 14 million gallons of re-
    claimed water.
    Clotrjrinir of the recharire well was caused primarily by ^us-
    pended-solids content (turbidity) of the injected water. Con-
    centrations above 1 milligram per liter as silica caused dis-
    proportionately hiirher rates of cloircini; than those below 1
    millicram per liter. Microbial growth was an insiiniiricant
    factor m cioiririntr as lonir as a total residual chlorine level
    of aoout J milligrams per liter was maintained.
    Specific capacity of the recnarire well diminished gradually
    dunnir injection hut was partly restored by pumping and
    sunrinir the well. Pumpini* rate was commonly 400 to iOO
    gallons per minute Dosini; the well with hydrochloric acid
    aided in removal of cloiririnir material that could not be dis-
    lodtred liy pumpinir alone Dosing with solutions of sodium
    hypochlorite and a bactericidal ammonium compound resulted
    in some improvement in specific capacity Biodei;radation of
    the clocc'nc materials occurred when the well was idle after
    injection. r«le\elopment bv punipini: and sunrtni; was more
    iucce«.iiul .itter idle penod- of -.everal weeks
    INTRODUCTION
    Growth in the population of Nassau County, a
    suburb ot New York City, ha.> been accompanied by
    increased withdrawals of ground water, which, in
    1974, \\the onh >ourceoi puokc--uppiy Aater Ne:
    withdrawals from the ground-water system have re-
    sulted in declining ground-water levels and decreased
    streamflow (Franke, 1968: Garber and Sulam, 1976)
    and in local landward movement of salty ground
    water ( Lusczynski and Swarzenski, 1966; Cohen and
    Kimmel. 1970). A continued increase in net with-
    drawals is expected as population, per capita water
    use, and percentage of population served by sewers
    increase. The^ growth factors indicate a water-
    suppK dericit of between 71.1 and 91 1 Mgal d by
    1990 (Temporary State Commission on Water Sup-
    ply Need-, of Southeastern New York. 1972, p
    142-144)
    One of several alternatives under consideration by
    Nassau County to meet the anticipated water-supply
    deficit is reclamation of water from sewage and in-
    jection of the reclaimed water into the ground-water
    reservoir (Peter; and Rose. 1968) From 1968 to
    1973. the Nas-au County Department of Public
    Works operated a pilot advanced waste-treatment
    plant at Bay Park. N Y.. near the ^outh shore of
    Nassau Countv (rig 1) Reclaimed water from this
    plant was used in a series of deep-well artificial-re-
    charge experiments by the U S. Geological Survey in
    cooperation with the Nassau County Department of
    Public Works These tests were intended to provide
    some ot the scientific and engineering data needed
    to evaluate the degree, causes, and remedies for
    well clogging that results from injection of reclaimed
    water and the geochemical compatibilitv of the
    reclaimed water with the aquifer.
    PLRPOSE \XD SCOPE
    This report is the sixth and last chapter in U S.
    Geological Survey Professional Paper 751, "Deep-
    Well Artincial-Recharge Experiments at Bay Park.
    Ft
    [4-1T3
    

    -------
    SECTION 4.3.2
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (or SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    AUTHOR:
    (or INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION:
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES:
    Notification of Threat to
    Underground Source of Drinking
    Water
    W.J. Whitsell, Sr. Groundwater
    Engineer, Engineering Enterprises,
    Inc.
    July, 1986
    Florida Sewage Treatment Plant
    Barceloneta, Puerto Rico
    USEPA, Region II
    Sewage treatment plant
    The Florida Sewage Treatment Plant
    is designed for tertiary treatment
    of 167,000 gallons per day (gpd)
    of domestic sewage and is
    currently handling more than twice
    the design flow. It appears thac
    sufficient chlorination is not
    provided prior to discharge lo an
    improved sinkhole. The plant may
    be in violation of Federal law
    that prohibits the injection of
    wastes which endanger human health
    into or above an USDW.
    

    -------
    ENGINEERING
    ENTERPRISES, INC
    WATER RESOURCES SPECIALISTS
    1225 West Main. Suits 215
    Norman, Oklahoma 73069
    Phone (405) 329-3300
    Telex 333668 (ENG ENT INC)
    July 3, 1986
    Mr. William Pedicino
    Groundwater Protection Program Manager
    U.S. EPA - Region 2
    26 Federal Plaza
    New York, N.Y. 10278
    Dear Mr. Pedicino:
    Enclosed please find the first "Notification of Threat to
    Underground Source of Drinking Water (USDW)
    This is sent to you in compliance with terms of contract 68-
    01-7011, Work Assignment No. 2-4, Assessment of Class V Wells in
    Puerto Rico, which states, "The Contractor will notify EPA
    immediately when a well which poses a potential threat to public
    health is identified." It is our considered opinion that the
    Florida Sewage Treatment Plant operation constitutes a
    significant threat to public health.
    Sincerely yours,
    
    W.J. Whitsell
    Senior Groundwater Engineer
    WJW: skm
    Enclosures
    cc: Ing. Pedro Gelabert
    Roger Anzzolin
    Norman, Oklahoma
    Long Beach. California
    Ithaca. New York
    

    -------
    NOTIFICATION OF THREAT TO UNDERGROUND SODRCE
    OF DRINKING WATER (USDW)
    AQUIFER THREATENED (name) Agaado/Clbao	
    LOCATION:
    DISTRICT
    STATE Puerto Rico		Arecibo
    MUNICIPALITY	Barceloneta TOWN	Florida
    NATURE OF THREAT:
    KIND OF WELL *mProved Sinkhole (Class V injection well)
    NATURE OF INJECTATE Incompletely created sewage
    EXACT SITE: LATITUDE/LONGITUDE 13°22 ' 15"/6o°34 ' 15"
    TOWNSHIP/RANGE/SECTION	~	
    STREET ADDRESS 	Hw. P.R. 642, Florida
    IDENTITY (name) Florida Sewage Treatment Plant	
    OWNER/OPERATOR 	Puerto Rlcan Aqueduct and Sewer Authority (PRASA)
    POPULATION(S) THREATENED: Town of Florida - pop. 3,640 (1980 census).
    Other "Barrios" downgradient: Bajonales: La Alianza: Allende: La Romana:
    Crace Magueyes; Cortes - populations unknown	
    OPERATIONAL HISTORY
    See nexc page
    1
    [4-113
    

    -------
    The Florida Sewage Treatment Plant, operated by the Puerto
    Rican Aqueduct and Sewer Authority (PRASA) is located about 1/4
    mile west of the center of the town bearing the same name.
    The plant/ designed for tertiary treatment of 167,000
    gallons per day (gpd) of domestic sewage, is currently handling
    more than twice the design flow. Only secondary treatment is
    being applied as the tertiary section (sand filtration beds) was
    removed from service some 3 years ago.
    At the time of the inspection—performed by Ms. Racqueline
    Shelton, U.S. EPA Environmental Scientist with the Caribbean
    Field Office in San Juan and by the undersigned—, discharge from
    the plant was about 360,000 gpd. It was turbid, and light brown
    in color; an earlier examination by H. Silva, Engineer with this
    firm, revealed the presence of 1 inch-long worms in the effluent.
    PRASA's records of plant operation confirm the low plant
    efficiency and the discharge of incompletely treated sewage.
    (The PRASA directors and plant operators have been most courteous
    and cooperative throughout this investigation and repeatedly
    assured us that any data at their disposal would be provided to
    us.}
    Before discharge from the plant, the effluent is
    chlorinated. The operator told us a concentration of 2 ppm of
    chlorine residual is sought. This is probably inadequate to
    disinfect the effluent with so much organic matter and suspended
    solids present.
    2
    [4-117
    

    -------
    The effluent is discharged directly to a sinkhole that has
    been "improved" by the installation of a vertical pipe and the
    construction of a low, concrete wall around the entire sinkhole
    area. The sinkhole directs the wastewater into or above the
    water table aquifer.
    During the summer of 1985, leakage through the bottom of the
    trickling filter became so great; that the filter had to be by-
    passed for repair. Just prior to the repair, the town of Florida
    experienced an outbreak of gastroenteritis. The relationship
    between this outbreak and the sewage treatment plant operation
    has not been established.
    The Puerto Rican Office of National Resources identifies the
    aquifer serving wells in the area as either the Aquado or the
    Cibao—in either case a water table aquifer and therefore not
    protected by any confining layer.
    Although reliable data on groundwater levels and direction
    of flow are either difficult to get or unavailable, the flow
    generally has to be northward [northwest through northeast),
    toward the coast. Any of these directions would carry
    groundwater from the sewage treatment plant area past one or more
    of the water wells in the area.
    POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS
    The most obvious corrective step is to stop discharging
    plant effluent into the Karst formations (through the improved
    sinkhole). Possible alternatives for sewage disposal might be:
    3
    

    -------
    1.	Shut down the existing plant at Florida and divert all
    sewage to a new sewer line that would carry it to the
    sewage treatment plant at Barceloneta;
    2.	Increase the capacity and efficiency of the plant so
    that its effluent would meet NPDS requirements for
    discharge to surface streams or to the ocean; or
    3.	Dispose of the plant effluent through properly
    constructed, monitored and maintained disposal wells in
    suitable formations deeper than the deepest known
    OSDW's.
    Economic considerations will weigh heavily in the necessary
    feasibility studies. Any solution will be expensive. PRASA is
    the agency best qualified to evaluate solutions such as the first
    two listed above.
    The third (deep disposal well) may not even be possible.
    The existence of a suitable infection zone would first have to be
    established? a very expensive exploratory drilling operation
    would be necessary. Even if such an injection zone were found,
    the completion of a properly constructed disposal well through
    Karst formations would be another very expensive construction
    project. Finally, unless the injection zone were another
    cavernous, channeled formation, the injectate would have to be
    highly treated to avoid plugging problems during operations. The
    third alternative should be considered only as a last resort.
    4
    [4-na]
    

    -------
    RECOMMENDATION
    The Puerto Rican Aqueduct and Sewer Authority should be
    advised that the Florida Sewage Treatment Plant operation is in
    violation of Federal law that prohibits the injection of wastes
    which endanger human health (40 CFR 144.12(a)) into or above a
    DSDW. PRASA should be directed to prepare its proposal £or
    eliminating discharges to the underground formations and develop
    a schedule for the work, to be approved by EPA.
    Senior Groundwater Engineer
    5
    [4-120]
    

    -------
    SECTION 4.3.3
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (or SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    AUTHOR:
    (or INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION:
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES:
    "Assessment of Recharge Wells,"
    Assessment of Class V Wells in the
    State of Virginia
    CH2M Hill
    April, 1983
    Moore's Bridges Filter Plant
    Norfolk, Virginia
    USEPA Region II
    Water Treatment Plant
    The report describes the
    assessment of an injection well
    used to recharge an aquifer with
    treated wastewater. It provides
    general information on the well
    and a brief summary of the
    project, hydrogeology of che area,
    and discussion of the
    contamination potential. (Note:
    pages 37 and 38 were combined.)
    

    -------
    3.0—ASSESSMENT OF RECHARGE WELLS
    Two wells were selected by EPA Region III under this
    category.
    3.1 FACILITY NO. VAS 710 5R 0001
    3.1.1 GENERAL INFORMATION AND DESCRIPTION
    Well Number
    Owner/Location
    Source of Information
    Nature of Business or Facility
    Number of Wells
    Construction Features:
    Depth
    Casing (diameter-depth)
    Construction Method
    Grout
    Special Features
    Use of Well
    Source of Injected Fluid
    Volume of Injected Fluid
    Operation Status
    Operation Period
    Driller
    Consultant
    Available
    D«te Visited
    -	VAS 710 5R 0001
    City of Norfolk, VA
    Moore's Bridges Filter
    Plant
    -	Mr. Craig Ziescmer &
    Mr. Creech - Plant
    Personnel
    -	Water Treatment Plant
    -	1
    990 feet
    32-inch - 100 feet
    18-inch - 125 feet
    8-inch - 1251 to 896'
    to 976'
    Rotary
    896' to land surface
    Gravel Packed - 896'
    to 990'
    Test Recharge/Recovery
    Treated water from plant
    115 400 gpm
    Inactive
    Less than 6 months
    Unknown
    U. S. Geological Survey
    Geological Survey
    Professional Paper 939
    - May 20, 1981
    - 35 -
    [4-122]
    

    -------
    This recharge well is part of a test well field installed at
    the Moore's Bridges Filter Plant, Norfolk, Virginia. The
    location of this well is shown on Figure 3-1. The following
    has ben extracted from "Artificial Recharge ..to a.. Fresh-
    water-Sensitive _Brackish-Water Sand Aquifer, Norfolk,
    Virginia" by Donald L. Brown and William D. Silvey; U. S.
    Geological Survey Professional Paper 939 for this paragraph
    and adapted in Paragraph 3.1.2 Hydrogeology.
    The water supply for the City of Norfolk, Virginia,
    comes from surface impoundments to the independent
    cities of Nansemond, Norfolk, and Virginia Beach.
    During the winter months, when water demand is low and
    reservoirs are full, water must be diverted from the
    reservoirs and allowed to escape to the ocean with the
    potential use of water unfulfilled. It has been
    estimated (Schweitzer, oral commun., 1968) that as much
    as 2.5 Bgal (billion gallons) water per winter quarter
    could be available for use if sufficient storage areas
    were available.
    The U.S. Geological Survey and the city of Norfolk
    entered into a cooperative program to determine if it
    would be possible to utilize the water presently
    flowing to waste by processing it in the treatment
    plants and storing it underground in aquifers
    containing saline water. The freshwater would then be
    retrieved during the summer months when peak water
    demands and low water levels in reservoirs place
    strains on the present water system.
    During late 1971 and early 1972, three injection and
    withdrawal tests were made at the Norfolk, Virginia
    injection site. In test 1, freshwater was injected at
    the rate of 400 gpm. The specific capacity of the well
    decreased from 15.4 to 9.3 gpm/ft of drawdown
    (injection pressure increase) at the end of 260 minutes
    (4.3 hours) of injection. In test 2, the initial
    injection rate of 400 gpm decreased to 215 gpm after
    7,900 minutes (5.5 days) of injection. The specific
    capacity dropped from 14.2 to 3.7 gpm/ft during the
    test. At the start of test 3, the aquifer accepted
    water at a maximum rate of 290 gpm, but the injection
    rate decreased to 100 gpm within 150 minutes
    (2.5 hours) and continued to decrease to a low of
    70 gpm after approximately 1,300 minutes (0.9 days).
    The specific capacity decreased from 3.7 to
    0.93 gpm/ft. Attempts at redevelopment of the
    injection well failed to improve the specific capacity.
    Treatment of the injection well with a clay stabilizer
    prior to the injection of any freshwater will minimize
    clogging and increase recovery of freshwater. If
    plugging of the screen can be prevented so that
    - 36 -
    [4-1231
    

    -------
    injection and withdrawal flow patterns remain similar,
    the storage of freshwater in a brackish-water sand
    aquifer is feasible.
    2.1.2. HYDROGEOLOGY
    This well is located in the Atlantic coastal plain province
    in southeast Virginia. The injection zone is in the lower
    artesian aquifer system as described in the referenced
    report described in Paragraph 3.1.1.
    "The lower artesian aquifer is the principal source of
    water in southeastern Virginia. It consists
    essentially of a single geologic unit that underlies
    the entire southeast area. The aquifer, which is
    overlain by the upper artesian aquifer system and is
    underlain by crystalline bedrock, is wedge-shaped and
    thickens eastward from a few tens of feet or less at
    the fall zone to about 2,400 feet at the shoreline in
    the city of Virginia Beach. The average thickness of
    the fresh- water zone is about 330 feet. The aquifer
    materials are variable in character and consist of
    lenses and beds of fine to coarse sand, gravel, silt
    and clay, and mixtures of these sediments.1*
    The injection zone selected for this well lies below the
    fresh-water zones in the lower artesian aquifer, at depths
    between 900 and 1,000 feet.
    The chosen aquifer for injection is a moderately sorted,
    angular to sub-angular fine to medium-grained, poorly
    cemented quartz sand.
    The-formation water in the injection zone is brackish having
    a dissolved-solids concentration of 3,010 mg/1 and is not
    used as a source of water supply at present.
    3.1.3 CONTAMINATION POTENTIAL
    Due to the good quality of treated freshwater that was
    injected during these tests, there is no contamination
    potential to this aquifer. These wells have not been used
    since the experimental work performed in the early 1970's
    and reportedly due to the relatively poor results caused by
    clogging of the screens by the native clays in the formation
    it is doubted that further development of this recharge/
    recovery well field is likely.
    corrective measures
    Hone recommended.
    3.1.5 REMEDIAL ACTIONS
    None recommended.
    - 37 -
    [4-1241
    

    -------
    ST^vV&Vi \	NORFOLK INTERnaTiOn"
    v- %/£//*&; • ' , ^	airport
    
    \	\. 9/J >
    fveU«v • -XV^A'Ji
    „tVr-. l* Y ,	,
    f. ,X : •..•:-.-.v. |" /
    yrXV^^r-'JlB\. ';•*•—-8MU>
    ' •	y* » •	# \ « . • • . 9M 14)f
    //
    HM
    23
    y 4
    nomi.
    
    
    •	T'•
    ' * v. >•.
    *	$ ¦-.
    ScaleinFeet
    5^ ' 1,000 2,000 A
    U- v.V
    :	^ J*
    7V§	^
    i 9#
    Pi«»trou*d
    'or:HaJT
    &
    Burtons
    Camden
    Heights
    • •
    8M1I
    ' JLakt Wri^i
    "r^SL v ^•^J/p>'a:ion
    
    Well
    Location
    •£»"	Diamond
    • ./.*<	IT Estates
    . .•„• V.	:'l»
    V,	.:: ?
    S. rSV-. V. V\	; U° .'
    * \ * •\. • *. V	 . i ••»
    V-\*: (•'ShiSs#^1
    V , *X •* " • • •• •€•••» .,
    • V^JV- v». :\. :?jrr
    **' Vi I:
    *rev-a >.Y
    ' " - —-£,¦:! ¦•
    Ch'\
    ' Y
    \ * .;' *• Norfolk
    ^ * / » '
    ,-Piaygreunc • >*j - «.	 ¦*
    ^:~4i
    . MuniciSal*S
    •' • I_1	
    • / '#;H i«kft»
    *
    1 Jr High 5ch
    •»>
    >j £*
    &L«.
    uV *
    ac ;f \y
    *j i x -
    \i
    •i*
    •m
    1»
    ^1; Ho,o.iiT'iA\?^,/ ^
    ¦•l ¦ VirtMiJfMbU	• ®£V<
    .1- teP\\ChV^/-' '<•* •
    • A€c\i^sfeSar-
    Ctnttr %
    n -a. %
    SiW
    Manle'tl ¦—v:
    *-*. *'~vr ^;rTra^
    •# ^ W?«	B» «?*. J ¦
    a • / •-••• .* l " ¦ L/>«i^h^ f
    »icir3\H23
    •Ip .
    	*.A r.
    Thomas
    0'»ve-tn •
    ^mer m vt.Thi"" -•
    » £&h ¦ V,GIen Ro
    Corner
    
    ¦;. ••"-¦•r. -vjoS
    aston.
    ^ Noulu ...7r T«^f5*«tiri r^sr-
    , :R«ileston w_t*jf ':;;; ;.':u»i^J
    /
    I t .MWtdHMOM •
    FIGURE 3-1.
    Location of Facility No. VAS 71o'5R 0001 2^
    City of Norfolk.
    - 39 -
    1.4-125]
    

    -------
    SECTION 4.3.4
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (or SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    AUTHOR:
    (or INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION:
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    "Artificial Recharge Wells,"
    Underground Injection Operations
    in Texas: A Classification and
    Assessment of Underground
    Injection Activities,
    Report 291
    Texas Department of
    Resources
    Water
    December, 1984
    Hueco Bolson Recharge Project,
    El Paso, Texas
    USEPA Region VI
    Sewage treatment facility and
    recharge project
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES:	One type of well used for recharge
    of aquifers in Texas includes
    treated effluent injection wells.
    Two pilot injection wells and ten
    proposed wells will be used to
    inject wastewater (treated to
    drinking water standards). The
    Recharge Project is authorized by
    a wastewater permit issued by the
    Department of Water Resources.
    (Note: Figures and Tables have
    been omitted.)
    [4-1251
    

    -------
    ARTIFICIAL RECHARGE WELLS
    Introduction
    Texas has many valuable aquifers which provide water for irrigation and municipal and
    domestic needs. However, because of increasing demand for ground water, excessive pumping of
    some aquifers is depleting underground supplies of water Replenishment of ground water
    usually occurs through natural recharge where surface water enters pores and fractures on the
    outcrop of an aquifer, or percolates through over lying sediments to enter the aquifer Where
    water has been produced from an aquifer faster than the rate of natural recharge to the aquifer,
    methods have been sought for replacing the depleted water supply These methods have usually
    involved operation of wells which inject surplus volumes of surface water into the underground
    aquifer
    In the last 20 to 30 years, farmers throughout the High Plains of Texas have been using the
    injection well method of artificial recharge with "dual-purpose" wells which can alternately
    produce ground water for irrigation and inject surface runoff water back into the underground
    aquifer With advances in technology, the basic artificial recharge well has been applied to other
    ground-water problems including secondary recovery of capillary ground water, flood control and
    storm water drainage, and control of subsidence and salt water intrusion Artificial recharge
    wells, m their various applications, are Class V wells under the regulatory jurisdiction of the Texas
    Department of Water Resources, local water districts, and city and county governments
    Following are descriptions of various types of wells used for artificial recharge of aquifers in
    Texas Assessments are presented by geographic area and well type Figure 8-1 shows the
    locations of artificial recharge wells investigated by the Department.
    Trans-Pecos Region
    El Paso Area
    Geohydrology
    The principal ground-water supply of the City of El Paso is the Hueco Bolson, which together
    with other bolson deposits of the Trans-Pecos region constitutes a major aquifer (Table 2-2].
    Hueco Bolson lies east of the City of El Paso and the Franklin Mountains (Figure 8-2). In Hueco
    Bolson. ground water occurs under water table conditions As ground water moves into the city
    artesian area, it passes beneath relatively impermeable sediments and becomes confined under
    pressure exerted by the higher elevation of the water surface underlying the mesa. Ground-water
    movement m the Hueco Bolson deposits in and adjacent to the city artesian area is predominantly
    t-i
    [4-127]
    

    -------
    EXPLANATION
    • Inaction nchvgi will
    A inaction rathtrgi will with
    cticmical andyiii tibulitid
    in tfiu roport
    ° Aitndonid iniicson rtcfi»g»w»H
    ~ Inaction will lor itcondvy
    rtcavtry of ground wattr
    a Floodwittf mitcnon wtll
    Figure 8-1.—Locations of Artificial Recharge Wells in Texas. 1982
    toward centers of water-well development and pumpage. Earlier studies suggested the same
    condition of ground-water movement toward producing well fields, and showed that the direction
    of regional ground-water movement in 1936 in Texas and Mexico was generally to the south and
    southeast toward the Rio Grande and other areas of natural discharge.
    Assessment of Treated Effluent Injection Wells
    The City of El Paso Water Utilities began construction of a 10 million gallons per day sewage
    treatment facility in 1983. The facility, located just northeast of the city, should be operating by
    1985. with treated wastewater to be injected into Hueco Bolson. Presently, two pilot iniection
    wells are in operation, with ten iniection wells proposed for the treatment facility Figure 8-3
    shows the wellhead of one of the operating injection wells. Figure 8-4 shows a diagram of Hueco
    Bolson recharge well design The Hueco Bolson project will treat wastewater to drinking water
    standards before injection into the local aquifer. Treated effluent will be injected into wells for
    8-2
    f4-
    128]
    

    -------
    Cuibirun
    
    Figure 8-2.—Alluvium and Bolson Aquifers of the Trans-Pecos Texas Region
    recharge of Hueco Bolson or directed to a nearby power station for industrial use. Table 8-1
    compares the water quality standards of the El Paso injected effluent with the water quality of the
    Hueco Bolson aquifer in the vicinity of the injection well project. From these data (Table 8-1) it is
    concluded that the El Paso recharge wells should have very low potential for contaminating the
    local ground-water supply, and that the ground water will be maintained at drinking-water
    quality.
    The Hueco Bolson Recharge Project in El Paso is authorized by a wastewater permit issued by
    the Department. The permit consolidates regulation of the treatment facilities and injection wells,
    under the authority of Chapter 26 of the Texas Water Code.
    8-3
    [4-129]
    

    -------
    SECTION 4.3.5
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (or SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    AUTHOR:
    (or INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION:
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES:
    From Assessment of Class V
    Injection Wells in the State of
    Wyoming
    Western Water Companies
    September, 1986
    Teton Village Wastewater Treatment
    and Disposal Plant, Teton Village,
    Wyoming, USEPA Region VIII
    Wastewater
    plan t
    treatment and disposal
    The Teton Village Wastewater
    Treatment and Disposal Plant was
    selected for assessment by che
    Wyoming	Department	of
    Environmental Quality Division in
    conjunction with Western Water
    Consultants, Inc. The facility
    discharges an average of 0.1
    million gallons per day of
    tertiary-treated sewage effluent
    into a shallow aquifer through
    three recharge wells. Water
    levels and water quality have been
    monitored at the recharge wells
    since 1981 and at 9 monitoring
    wells since 1978. The study
    discusses regional hydrogeology,
    site hydrogeology, facility-
    specific details (construction,
    etc.), background water quality,
    effluent characteristics, the
    effects of injection on
    groundwater, and the necessity for
    computer modeling.
    [4-130]
    

    -------
    CHAPTER 6
    RECHARGE WELLS - TETON VILLAGE
    Introduction
    "Recharge wells" are wells which are generally used to replenish
    the water supply in an aquifer. The injection by recharge wells is
    usually into or above sensitive aquifers.
    Three facilities, with a total of at least seven recharge wells,
    have been inventoried in the State of Wyoming. ,0f these, two facilities
    are related to mining or hydrocarbon recovery operations and the third
    (the Teton Village Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facility, discussed
    in this section) disposes treated sewage effluent. Injected water
    quality varies among wells of this type. Ground water reinjected as
    part of mining or hydrocarbon recovery operations may have elevated
    concentrations of sodium, sulfate and total dissolved solids with
    respect to the receiver. Injected sewage effluent may contain nitrates
    or ammonia, viral and bacterial organisms, and chlorides and chlorinated
    amines.
    The Teton Village Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Plant, Teton
    Village, Wyoming, has been selected for assessment by Wyoming Department
    of Environmental Quality/Water Quality Division (WDEQ/WQD), in
    conjunction with Western Water Consultants, Inc. (WWC), as a
    representative facility which uses recharge wells in the State of
    Wyoming. The facility discharges an average of 0.1 million gallons per
    day of tertiary-treated sewage effluent into a shallow aquifer through
    three recharge wells. Water levels and water quality have been
    90
    [4-131
    

    -------
    monitored at the recharge wells since 1981 and at 9 monitoring wells
    since 1978.
    Study Area
    Teton Village is located at the base of Rendezvous Mountain, a peak
    in the southern part of the Teton Range, Teton County, Wyoming, (Figure
    6-1) approximately 7 1/2 miles northwest of Jackson, Wyoming . The
    resort village contains 165.77 acres of private land located in the
    southern half of Section 24, T.42N., R.117W. The resort is bounded on
    the north and west by Teton National Forest lands; private lands make up
    the remaining boundaries. Teton Village has been in operation since the
    1965-1966 ski season.
    The wastewater treatment and disposal facility at Teton Village
    (Teton Village Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facility) is currently
    under the ownership and management of the Teton Village Water and Sewer
    District. The facility, as shown on Figure 6-1, is located in the SE 1/4
    SW 1/4 Section 24, T.42 N., R.117 W., Teton County, Wyoming, immediately
    south of Teton Village. The Teton Village Water and Sewer District is
    authorized by permit 6PC 84-190 (dated 11/29/84) to operate the recharge
    and monitor well systems associated with the wastewater treatment and
    disposal system.
    Regional Hydrogeology
    Geologic Setting
    Three major structural features in the study area are shown on
    Figure 6-2 (Blackstone, 1971): the Teton Range, Jackson Hole and the
    91
    [4-132]
    

    -------
    Teton Fault. The Teton Fault is a major east-dipping, normal,
    Precambrian-cored fault which trends northeast along the eastern flank
    of the Teton Range. The fault exhibits up to 20,000 feet of
    displacement and severs basin sediments to the east from the uplifted
    Precambrian tilt block to the west. The uplifted Precambrian block is
    capped by west-dipping Paleozoic strata that, in all but the southern
    terminus of the Teton Range, are hydrologically separated from the basin
    sediments. Near Teton Village, the Paleozoic strata are about 3,000
    feet above the valley floor.
    Jackson Hole is a broad, folded and faulted downwarp east of the
    Teton Fault (Cox, 1976). The basin is young in geologic terms and
    reflects active crustal movement continuing from mid-Pliocene time
    (approximately 8 million years ago) to the present. Approximately
    10,000 feet of poorly consolidated to unconsolidated lacustrine, glacial
    and alluvial sediments ranging in size from clay to coarse gravels have
    filled the basin since Pliocene time.
    Ground-Water Occurrence and Flow
    Ln the vicinity of the study area, ground water is present in 1)
    the Paleozoic strata high in the Teton Range; 2) the thin weathered zone
    that in places mantles the Precambrian metamorphic rocks of the Teton
    Range; 3) fractures and joints in the Precambrian rocks; and 4) the
    thick sequence of valley-fill alluvium underlying Jackson Hole. Only
    the valley-fill aquifer is important to this investigation.
    Ground-water is present in a shallow, unconfined aquifer up to 300
    feet thick that comprises alluvium and glacial outwash overlying
    lacustrine deposits in Jackson Hole (Cox, 1976). » The lacustrine
    94
    [4-133]
    

    -------
    deposits and deeper sediments are not considered in this report because
    they will not be affected by the Teton Village recharge wells.
    The main components of ground-water recharge to the Jackson Hole
    alluvial aquifer are 1) infiltration of precipitation; and 2)
    infiltration of seepage from numerous small streams and lakes fed by
    snowmelt runoff originating in the mountains. Minor recharge to the
    alluvium occurs through the weathered mantle on, and secondary fractures
    in, the metamorphic rock of the Teton Range and through minor aquifers
    in the Gros Ventre Range. Natural recharge of the alluvium and glacial
    outwash by these mechanisms occurs primarily at the foot of the mountain
    ranges which form the east and west boundaries of the alluvial valley.
    A minor source of recharge in the immediate study area is the injection
    well system at the Teton Village Wastewater Treatment and Disposal
    Facility.
    Figure 6-3 shows the approximate ground-water table for the Jackson
    Hole Area. Regionally, ground water flows south southwest, down the
    Snake River valley. The water table near the margins of the basin
    closely reflects the land surface. On the west side of the basin, near
    the study area, flow is directed east, off the eastern flank of the
    Teton Range.
    Cox (1976) summarized the water-yielding properties of the
    valley-fill aquifer in the Jackson Hole area. The aquifer yields from a
    few to 2,000 gallons per minut.e (gpm) to wells in Jackson Hole and as
    much as several cubic feet per second to individual springs in the area.
    95
    [4-1341
    

    -------
    «J*<5
    Qao*
    JACXSON
    
    Q
    r*0tpt
    La/4
    EXPLANATION
    TETON
    VILLAGE -
    -» ((i
    Wat«r-ubl« CDAtour
    •iltlmdt •/ *'» — u	»»* Uw~t
    mm of srftHm
    tie*
    9 t * 4 • 10 17 |« «*0«('*(S
    0 l I I •
    (uUlitfiOM 114
    MIUM It U(AM tu KML
    FIGURE 6-3
    WATER table in JACKSON HOLE
    ANO NEARBY STREAM VALLEYS
    ( Co* , 1976 )
    96
    [4-135]
    

    -------
    Site Hydrogeology
    The majority of the Teton Village wastewater treatment and disposal
    facility is located on alluvium and glacial outwash which were deposited
    on the eastern flanks of the Teton range and thicken basinward (Figure
    6-4). Ground water in the vicinity is present under unconfined
    conditions in the alluvial and glacial outwash deposits. The Spring
    Creek aquifer, as it is known locally, ranges from a thin veneer
    overlying the Precambrian rocks on the eastern flank of Rendezvous
    Mountain to approximately 200 to 300 feet in the main Snake River
    Valley. The aquifer locally comprises Quaternary alluvium and
    glacial-outwash deposits, predominantly poorly sorted silt, sand, gravel
    and cobbles and is 50 to 100 feet in the vicinity of Fish Creek and
    Teton Village.
    In the study area, the slope of the water table generally
    approximates that of the land surface, as shown on Figure 6-5. The
    steep, southeast-tending gradient at Teton Village indicates that the
    shallow aquifer receives a significant amount of recharge through the
    weathered mantle on the flank of Rendezvous Mountain. As the ground
    water flows southeast through the thickening wedge of alluvium and
    approaches the Teton fault, it is gradually diverted to the south and
    joins the regional flow system in the thicker valley-fill aquifer.
    Based on the elevations of the water table (6,267 ft) and Fish Creek, a
    tributary of the Snake River, (6,275 to 6,280 ft) southeast of Teton
    Village, it is likely that Fish Creek loses water to the shallow
    aquifer. The creek could not be a ground-water discharge point unless
    its elevation was at or below the water-table elevation. The creek has
    shallow banks and is not deeply incised into the alluvium. Because no
    97
    [4-136]
    

    -------
    Southeast
    i
    Northwest
    6600 -
    6400
    . Qal
    6200 -
    R. 117 W
    6000 -
    T 42 N
    5800
    SCALE
    2000 It
    i	I
    200-
    SCALL
    EX PLANA TION
    GEOLOGIC UNITS
    QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM AK
    GLACIAL OUTWASH DEPOSIT
    PRECAMBRIAN ROCKS,
    UNDIVIDED
    SYMBOLS
    i CROSS SECTION LOCATIOI
    WATER TABLE
    5600
    5400
    FIGURE 6-4 • SCHEMATIC GEOLOGIC CROS S - S EC T ION PARALLEL TO GROUND WATER FLOW,
    TETON VILLAGE WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL FACILITY STUDY AREA,
    TETON VILLAGE, WYOMING, 1906
    

    -------
    streamflow gaging data are available above or below this reach of Fish
    Creek, a relationship cannot be quantified.
    The ground-water monitoring program associated with the facility
    began prior to the installation of the recharge wells and provides a
    good indication of the seasonal fluctuations of the water table. During
    the winter months, the ground-water table is at its yearly low. It
    begins to rise in late March and peaks in mid-summer when it rises to
    within approximately 4 feet of the land surface near the recharge wells.
    A "pump-in/open end" test conducted in the gravel layer in monitor
    well OH-11 showed the aquifer to have a hydraulic conductivity of 5,000
    feet per day (ft/da) (Nelson Engineering and Culp Wesner Culp, 1979).
    Published values for hydraulic conductivity for gravels in the area
    range from 13 to 13,000 ft/da (Nelson Engineering and Culp Wesner Culp,
    1979). Drawdown tests, which were run in a gravel, silt and cobble
    aquifer with the Town of Jackson's Well No. 1, indicated a hydraulic
    conductivity of 1,100 ft/da. A drawdown test conducted in July 1980 by
    Nelson Engineering, using existing monitor wells 0H-11A, 0H-11, OH-13
    and OH-14- indicated a hydraulic conductivity of 3 ,000 ft/da and a
    transmissivity of 120,000 ft^/da.
    In July 1979 , attempts were made to determine the velocity of the
    ground-water by placing dye in monitor well 0H-3 and testing for it in
    the polishing pond and monitor well 0H-10. No trace of the dye was
    detected at these locations, indicating either a substantial dilution
    effect by the ground water or a flow path different from what was
    expected. The approximate ground-water flow rate calculated by WWC
    based on an assumed porosity of 35 percent, the hydraulic conductivity
    values presented above, and existing hydraulic gradients, is 230 ft/da.
    100
    [4-133]-
    

    -------
    Ground-Water Classification
    The ground water receiving the treated effluent from the Teton
    Village wastewater facility has been designated a Class I ground water
    of the State of Wyoming. Class I designation signifies that the ground
    water is suitable for domestic use, and must be sufficiently protected
    that it remains suitable for that use.
    Ground Water Use
    Ground-water rights and wells permitted by the Wyoming State
    Engineer are listed in Table 6-1. There are no permitted ground-water
    users immediately downgradient of the Teton Village Wastewater Treatment
    and Disposal Facility, and ground water affected by the Teton Village
    subsurface discharge is not known to be withdrawn for domestic or other
    use. Other ground-water users in the vicinity include private homes,
    businesses, and condominium complexes. Future developments will likely
    increase the use of ground water.
    Description of Facility
    The basic components of the -existing wastewater treatment facility
    were constructed in 1971 as a 200,000 gallons per day (gpd) contact-
    stabilization activated-sludge plant. The plant was put into operation
    for the 1S71-1972 ski season. An effluent polishing lagoon was
    constructed in 1973. Additional modifications were made in both 1978
    and 1979 to improve facility performance and reliability.
    Prior to May 1979, the treatment plant discharged effluent to Fish
    Creek, a tributary of the Snake River. Discharge to the Class I water
    101
    [4-1391.
    

    -------
    Table 6-1. Ground-Water Rights and Wells Permitted by the Wyoming State Engineer, Teton Village Area, Teton
    County, Wyoming.
    
    
    
    
    Depth to
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Static
    
    
    
    
    Permi t
    Facility
    Well
    Water
    Well
    Well3
    Year
    Location
    Number
    Name
    Depth
    Level
    Yield
    Use
    Drill
    (T R Sec i-i Sec)
    
    
    (ft)
    (ft)
    (gpm)
    
    
    42N 116W 19 SW/NW
    P21280 P
    Grey HI
    100
    -
    25
    DOM.STO
    1920
    SE/SE
    P37480 P
    Waincko #1
    50
    3
    12
    DOM
    1977
    20 NW/NW
    P6796 W
    Hoffman #2
    60
    34
    10
    DOM.STO
    1971
    NE/SW
    P9343 W
    Brooks #1
    47
    6
    20
    DOM
    1971
    SW/SW
    P68319 W
    Mathieu #1
    60
    4
    22
    DOM
    1984
    NW/SE
    P70646 W
    Daub HI
    60
    7
    22
    DOM
    1985
    NW/SE
    P55965 W
    Eaton HI
    60
    8
    15
    DOM
    1981
    29 SW/NW
    P49587 W
    Owl Ranch #1
    50
    7
    12
    DOM
    1979
    SE/NW
    P22423 P
    Donman #1
    21
    6
    5
    DOM
    1968
    SW/SW
    P21283 P
    Snake River Ranch #3
    60
    10
    25
    DOM
    1931
    Lot 3
    P40059 W
    Knori #1
    48
    10
    5
    DOM
    1978
    

    -------
    Table 6-1. Ground-Water Rights and Wells Permitted by the Wyoming State Engineer, Teton Village Area, Teton
    County, Wyoming (cont'd).
    Permi t
    Location	Number
    (T R Sec i-i Sec)
    Depth to
    Static
    Facility	Well Water
    Name	Depth Level
    (ft) (ft)
    Well	Well3	Year
    Yield	Use	Drilled
    (gpm)
    30 SW/NE
    PJ5096
    W
    Hughes 01
    62
    18
    15
    DOM
    1976
    32 NW/NW
    P21282
    P
    Snake River Ranch #2
    40
    5
    25
    DOM.STO
    1921
    SW/NW
    PI 1396
    W
    Resor #3
    60
    8
    25
    DOM
    1972
    SW/NW
    P21281
    P
    Snake River Ranch §1
    60
    10
    25
    DOM.STO
    1925
    42N 117W 24 NE/NW
    P5890
    w
    Crystal Spring Well #1
    15
    2
    75
    MIS.COM
    1965
    SE/SW
    P52720
    w
    0II-11A
    60
    25
    -
    MON
    1980
    SW/SE
    P52719
    w
    OH-15
    50
    20
    -
    MON
    1980
    NE/SE
    P32547
    w
    Jackson Hole Ski Corp. if 1
    158
    106
    200
    DOM,IRR,MIS
    1976
    25 NE/NW
    P52721
    w
    OH-13
    60
    22
    -
    MON
    1980
    NE/NW
    P52722
    w
    OH-14
    50
    24
    -
    MON
    1980
    a Ground-Water Rights and Wells Permitted by the Wyoming State Engineer, Teton Vellage Area, Teton County,
    Wyoming.
    

    -------
    of Fish Creek was discontinued then, and was switched to the polishing
    pond, a sand filter basin through which effluent is discharged to the
    Spring Creek aquifer. In 1981 the Village Sewer Company replaced the
    existing treatment plant with a new facility which would discharge into
    the Spring Creek aquifer via three recharge wells, instead of
    discharging water through a sand filter basin. The new facility
    consisted of secondary and tertiary treatment devices capable of
    producing an effluent of very good quality. Tertiary treatment consists
    of chlorination and sand filtration. Traditional measures of sewage
    effluent such as Total Suspended Solids and Biochemical Oxygen Demand
    are very low for the effluent from this plant, on the order of 10 mg/L
    or less. The plant is capable of routinely reducing total nitrogen
    content in the effluent to less than 10 mg/L as well.
    The recharge wells are 40 to 50 feet deep and consist of
    approximately 15 feet of 14-mch diameter steel casing set above 30 or
    33 feet of 12 1/2-inch diameter stainless steel well screen. All three
    wells are completed in the Spring Creek aquifer. Construction details
    for the recharge wells are listed in Table 6-2; a generalized typical
    completion is depicted on Figure 6-6. A site plan of the present Teton
    Village Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facility is shown on Figure
    6-7.
    With the new system in operation, the effluent from the wastewater
    treatment facility is discharged into the alluvial Spring Creek aquifer
    at depths between 16 and 42 feet below the land surface. Normally, the
    recharge wells operate on gravity discharge. A pressure pump system was
    installed, but to date pumped discharge has not been needed.
    104
    [4-1421
    

    -------
    Table 6-2. Construction Details for Recharge Wells, Teton Village Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facility, Teton Village, Wyoming.
    I tern
    Recharge Wells
    o
    CJ1
    1.	Name and Number
    2.	Location
    3.	Construction Start Date
    Construction Stop Date
    4.	Type of Well Construction
    5.	First Use Date
    6.	Hole Depth
    7.	Mole Diameter
    B.	Surface Elevation at Hell
    9.	Static Depth
    (After Screen Installation)
    10.	Casing Elevation
    11.	Well Development
    12.	Casing Description
    13.	Grput Depth
    14.	Well Completion
    15.	Screen Type
    16.	Slot Sue
    17	Perforation Interval
    RC -1
    SEJ SWi, Section 24
    T42N, R117W
    Teton County, WY
    9/17/81
    11/4/81
    Air Rotary
    12/25/81
    49'
    14"
    6291.00
    10/27/81
    19'
    6293.12
    Air Jet Water Surge
    New Steel
    14" 4 O.D.
    0.375 th.
    7'
    Concrete
    Screened
    304 Stainless Steel
    Cont Slot
    120
    N/A
    RC-2
    SEi SWi. Section 24
    T42H. R117W,
    Teton County, WY
    9/5/81
    11/6/81
    Air Rotary
    12/25/81
    42'
    14"
    6292.60
    11/9/81
    22'
    6294.09
    Air Jet Water Surge
    New Steel
    14" t O.D.
    0.375" th.
    7"
    Concrete
    Screened
    304 Stainless Steel
    Cont Slot
    120
    It/A
    RC-3
    SEi SWi, Section 24
    T42N, R117W
    Teton County, UY
    9/11/81
    11/9/81
    Air Rotary
    5/21/82
    46'
    14"
    6288.80
    11/4/81
    17'
    6291.01
    Air Jet Water Surge
    New Steel
    14" (> O.D.
    0.375" th.
    5"
    Concrete
    Screened
    304 Stainless Steel
    Cont. Slot
    120
    N/A
    4*
    I
    4*
    M
    

    -------
    Table 6-2. Construction Details for Recharge Wells, Teton Village Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facility, Teton Village, Wyoming (cont'd).
    Item
    18.	Screen Diameter * Length
    19.	Effective Area
    20.	Developed Yield (pumpout)
    21.	Packer Installation
    22.	Screen Installation
    23.	Well Driller
    Recharge Wells
    24. Land Ownership
    121" x 33*
    1.27 ft?/LF
    750 gpm
    Stainless Steel
    w/ Neoprene O-Ring
    Pull Back
    Andrew Well Drilling
    1268 E 17th
    Idaho Falls. ID 83401
    Village Sewer Company
    P.O. Box 586
    Teton Village, UY 8302S
    121" x 30*
    1.27 ft2/LF
    595 gpm
    Stainless Steel
    w/ Heoprene 0-R1 rig
    Pull Back
    Andrew Well Drilling
    1268 E 17th
    Idaho Falls. 10 83401
    Village Sewer Company
    P.O. Box 586
    Teton Village, WY 83025
    121" * 30'
    1.27 ft2/LF
    670 gpm
    Stainless Steel
    w/ Neoprene 0-R1rg
    Pull Back
    Andrew Well Drilling
    1268 E 17th
    Idaho Falls. 10 83401
    Village Sewer Company
    P.O. Box 586
    Teton Village. WY 83025
    

    -------
    TYPICAL
    RECHARGE
    WELL
    AIR / VACUUM
    VALVE	
    Tj
    SURFACE
    5'-
    12" D IP.
    EFFLUENT LINE S
    5-7' 	 I
    jr
    SANITARY SEAL
    PRESSURE GAUGE
    9- 13'-
    42- 49 "
    CONCRETE PAD
    CEMENT GROUT
    14" X 15' STEEL CASING
    \ 7«	 PACKER
    12" X 30" STAINLESS
    STEEL SCREEN
    12" X 3' BLANK
    STEEL CASING
    TYPICAL
    MONITOR
    WELL
    SURFACE-
    5- 12*-
    5 - 15'
    
    28 - 60'
    NO ABOVE-SURFACE
    TREATMENT SPECIFIED
    4 " PVC SCH. 80 CASINO OR
    6 5/8" STEEL CASING
    BENTONITE SEAL
    4" PVC SCH. 80 CASING WITH
    1 /8" HOLES 6 PER ROW, ROVS 6"
    APART
    OR
    6 5/8" STEEL CASING WITH
    3/8" XI 1/2" MILL SLOTS,
    3 PER FOOT
    FIGURE 6-6 TYPICAL COMPLETION DIAGRAM OF RECHARGE AMD MONITOR WELLS
    

    -------
    »0H-3
    RC-1
    RC-2 !
    TREATMENT
    PLANT
    OH-
    PAST LOCATION OF
    POLISHING POND
    so rt
    SCALE
    COMPUTE
    BLDG. /
    AEROBIC
    SLUOGE
    OIGESTOR
    OH" IIA
    O
    op
    RC-3
    

    -------
    The recharge well system is authorized as a miscellaneous discharge
    to ground-waters of the State of Wyoming by a permit (6PC 84-190) issued
    by the Department of Environmental Quality. The three recharge wells
    authorized are wells RC-1, RC-2 and RC-3 in the SE 1/4 SW 1/4, Section
    24, T.42N., R.117W., Teton County, Wyoming (Figure 6-7).
    Ground Water Monitoring Prior to Recharge Well Installation
    Monitoring of the ground-water at the Teton Village Wastewater
    Treatment and Disposal Facility began in November 1978 with the
    installation of 8 monitoring wells. Ground water levels and quality
    have subsequently been monitored by the operator, since January 1979.
    Monitor wells constructed in 1978 are not permitted with the State
    Engineer's office and well construction data are limited. Very little
    information on these well completions is available and existing
    completion data are inconsistent. For this study, WWC has not included
    pre-1981 past monitoring data in the analysis of the recharge site.
    Background Water Quality
    The background quality of the ground water into which the Teton
    Village wastewater is injected is very good. A typical analysis of
    water-quality parameters from background well OH-3 is shown in Table
    6-3. The water is useable for domestic, municipal, industrial,
    irrigation or stock purposes, and meets the requirements for a Class I
    ground water in the State of Wyoming (Chapter VIII, Wyoming Water
    Quality Rules and Regulations). The water is low in dissolved solids,
    soft, shows little or no evidence of contamination by human or animal
    109
    [4-147]
    

    -------
    Table 6-3. Water Quality Data from Well OH-3, October 22, 1981.
    Parameter	Well OH-3
    (mg/L)
    Aluminum	<0.001
    Ammonia	<0.01
    Arsenic	<0.001
    Barium	0.065
    Cadmium	<0.001
    Chloride	6.0
    Chromium	<0.001
    Cyanide	<0.001
    Iron	0.180
    Lead	<0.001
    MPN Fecal Coliform MPN/100 ml.	<2.0
    MPN Total Coliform MPN/100 mL	79.0
    Manganese	0.110
    Nitrate	0.35
    Nitrite	0.01
    Oil and Grease	1.00
    Phenol	<0.001
    Selenium	<0.001
    Silver	<0.001
    Sodium	8.10
    Sulfate	<3.0
    Total Dissolved Solids	245.0
    Turbidity NTU	2.70
    Zinc	0.230
    pH Units	7.40
    110
    [4-143]
    

    -------
    activity, and is not known to contain chemical contaminants resulting
    from industrial activity.
    Recharge Well Operation
    The tops of the recharge wells are provided with a pressure gauge
    and an air/vacuum valve. The treated wastewater can flow either by
    gravity or under pressure to the recharge wells. Gate valves are used
    to control the recharge well or combination of recharge wells to which
    the effluent flows. Under normal operating conditions, treated
    wastewater will gravity-flow to the recharge wells.
    During the months of May through August, the high ground-water
    table combined with a ground-water mound created by the recharge wells
    could make gravity flow from the clear well to the recharge wells
    impossible. Water levels in the recharge wells are monitored daily to
    document ground-water mounding so that corrective action can be taken if
    necessary to prevent treated effluent and/or ground water from rising to
    the surface in one or more recharge wells. A high water level alarm is
    installed in the facility to alert the operator to inadequate gravity
    flow. The treatment facility is designed to allow the -treated
    wastewater to be pumped to the recharge wells.
    Injection of Effluent
    All the wastewater produced by the Teton Village Wastewater and
    Disposal Facility is discharged to one recharge well at a time,
    permitting the other recharge wells to recover. No more than one
    recharge well is used at any given time without prior^written approval
    from WDEQ/WQD.
    Ill
    [4-149]
    

    -------
    Effluent flow is changed monthly to a different recharge well. The
    recharge well system was designed to accept effluent at a rate not to
    exceed 0.83 million gallons per day (mgd). Effluent recharge generally
    ranges from .05 mgd during the off-season (May & June) to about 0.2 mgd
    during late summer, and averages 0.1 mgd. Total effluent flow to each
    recharge well is shown on Figure 6-8 for the period January 1985 to
    March 1986.
    Quality of Effluent
    Effluent quality is monitored and analyzed on the same schedule as
    the ground-water monitor wells. Samples are collected from the effluent
    just before it enters the recharge well system and are analyzed for
    parameters included in the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Interim
    Primary Drinking Water Standards. Table 6-4 summarizes the chemical
    quality of the effluent when sampled at various intervals from November
    1981 to February 1986. Comparison of concentrations present in the
    effluent to maximum levels set by EPA Interim Primary Drinking Water
    Standards indicates the effluent meets all EPA standards except for
    turbidity and coliform bacteria.
    The Teton Village wastewater treatment system generally produces an
    excellent quality effluent for injection, as demonstrated by the data in
    Table 6-4. At one time, the facility discharged effluent with a
    significant concentration of phenols. Correspondence in the WDEQ/WQD
    files indicates that this problem was traced to the use of various
    cleaning chemicals which were subsequently dumped into the system. The
    problem was alleviated by strongly discouraging the use of the chemicals
    112
    [4-130]-
    

    -------
    $
    o
    U-
    01
    li- c
    O 0
    IA |
    Z 2
    O w
    _i
    _i
    <(
    o
    6.0
    5.5
    5.0 -
    4.5 -
    FIGURE 6-8 TOTAL EFFLUENT FLOW
    TETON VILLAGE WASTEWATER FACILITY
    RC — 1
    RC-
    RC-3
    RC— 1
    RC —3
    -RC- 1
    1.0 -|			r
    1/27/85	4/2/85
    RC—2
    i
    Ul
    6/5/85	8/3/85
    DATE RECHARGE WELL WAS CHANGED
    1	1	I
    10/23/85 1/1/86	3/15/86
    

    -------
    Table 6-4. Comparison of Effluent Quality Parameters with Interim Primary Drinking Water Standards.
    U.S. EPA Interim Primary			Date Effluent Sampled	
    Parameter	Drinking Water Standard	11/18/81	12/17/84	12/19/85
    (mg/L)
    Arsenic
    0.05
    0.006
    <0.001
    <0.001
    Barium
    1.0
    0.010
    0.01
    0.02
    Cadmium
    0.01
    <0.001
    <0.001
    <0.001
    Chromium
    0.05
    <0.001
    <0.001
    <0.001
    Lead
    0.05
    <0.001
    <0.005
    <0.001
    Mercury
    0.002
    —
    <0.002
    —
    Nitrate (as N)
    10
    3.92
    9.80
    0.23
    Selenium
    0.01
    <0.001
    <0.001
    —
    SiIver
    0.05
    <0.001
    <0.001
    <0.001
    Radium
    5 pCi/L
    --
    <1.0
    <1.6
    Gross Alpha
    15 pCi/L
    --
    <2.0
    <2.0
    Gross Beta
    4 inillirem/yr
    --
    <3.0
    <3.0
    Turbidity
    1/TU
    1.20
    5.50
    5.10
    Coliform Bacteria
    1/100 mL
    5.0
    - _
    	
    -- Not analyzed.
    

    -------
    in question. There was also a period of time when the concentration of
    cyanide in the effluent was sufficiently high to cause a violation of
    the Permit. This problem was caused by the use of cyanuric acid at a
    swimming pool which discharged to the sewage treatment facility, and was
    eliminated by ceasing use of that chemical.
    Figures 6-9 through 6-12 present effluent water quality data for
    ammonia, nitrate, oil and grease, and phenols. Ammonia and nitrate
    concentrations are given as nitrogen (NH^-N and NO^-N) on figures 6-9
    and 6-10. The figures show measured parameter concentrations for the
    period between October 1981 and February 1986. Although there is
    considerable variability in the data for each parameter, the overall
    effluent quality can be seen to be good, with occasional increases or
    "spikes" being exhibited by all of the parameters. The data exhibit
    some seasonal variation also. Some parameters, particularly ammonia,
    tend to reach highest concentrations in the winter months. Ammonia is
    likely affected by decreased nitrification rates that result from lower
    operating temperatures during winter.
    Total dissolved solids (TDS) in the effluent is significantly
    higher than background concentrations in the receiving aquifer.
    Domestic use of water ordinarily results in an increase in TDS
    concentrations in sewage effluent (when compared with the water supply)
    due to addition of various soluble salts to the water during use. The
    concentration in the effluent, however, would not render the receiving
    water unfit for any of the uses for which it is currently suitable. In
    fact, the TDS concentration in the effluent is much lower than that in
    the raw water supplies of many Wyoming communities. Additionally, this
    115
    [4-153]
    

    -------
    \
    «
    E
    w
    n
    z
    o
    z
    111
    o
    z
    o
    a
    •<
    z
    o
    2
    2
    28.00
    FIGURE 6-9
    EFFLUENT AMMONIA CONCENTRATIONS
    28,00
    24*00 -
    20.00
    IS. 00 -
    18.00 -
    14.00 -
    12.00 -
    10.00 -
    ~i i i -1 ~i i r" i ~i r i i ~i l t i i
    Jan—81 Aug—81 F«b-82 S«p-B2 Uar-83 0—82 War—83 83 Apr-84 Nov—84 Jan—83 0*4—88 Jul—88
    MONTH OF OPERATION
    116
    [4-154]
    

    -------
    z
    o
    e
    z
    u
    a
    z
    a
    a
    o
    z
    Id
    z
    a.
    0.15 -r
    0.17 -f
    0.18
    0.15
    0.14
    0.13
    0.12
    0.11
    0.10
    0.09
    o.oa
    0.07
    o.oa
    o.oa
    0.04
    0.03
    0.02
    0.01
    0.00
    1
    FIGURE 6-11
    EFFLUENT PHENOLS CONCENTRATIONS (mo/1)
    T
    23.6 Q
    -r-er
    
    |,n".| | I p-
    Jan-fll Aug—81 F«b-82 S«p-82 Uar—SJ O0+-8J Apr-fl* Nov-S4 Jun-flS Om-U JuI-85
    UONTH OF OPERATION
    FIGURE 6-12
    EFFLUENT OIL * CHEASE CONCENTRATIONS
    \
    9
    E
    v
    ti
    z
    a
    P
    1
    z
    U
    
    -------
    level of TDS is rapidly diluted to near-background levels after
    injection into the receiving aquifer, as will be shown later.
    Because of the strictly domestic (as opposed to industrial) origin
    of the wastewater at Teton Village, there is little likelihood that
    significant quantities of synthetic organic chemicals will enter the
    wastewater collection system. The principal contaminants of concern in
    the Teton Village effluent are ammonia (as ammonium ions) and nitrate.
    These two chemical species both contain nitrogen, and are closely
    related in both the sewage treatment and ground-water regimes. In the
    sewage treatment plant, nitrogen-containing organic compounds which
    occur naturally in sewage are converted to ammonia and then to nitrate
    by a series of biochemical reactions. The conversion of ammonia to
    nitrate continues, although at a much slower rate, in oxygenated ground
    water such as exists at Teton Village.
    There is no drinking water standard for ammonia at the federal
    level, and there is no health threat associated with drinking water
    having ammonia concentrations similar to those in the Teton Village
    effluent. Class I ground waters of Wyoming are, however, limited to
    containing 0.5 mg/L ammonia (NH^ as N) by State standards. There are
    both federal and state standards for nitrate in drinking water. The
    nitrate standards of 10 mg/L are based on the observed occurrence of
    adverse health affects in infants drinking water with nitrate
    concentrations in excess of the standard.
    Ammonia in ground water tends to attenuate with time due to a) ion
    exchange onto chemically active sites on clay and silt particles in the
    aquifer, and b) ultimate biochemical conversion to nitrate as described
    118
    [4-1581-
    

    -------
    above. In oxygenated ground water, however, nitrate is attenuated very
    slowly. In view of these facts, we have chosen to treat ammonia and
    nitrate in the Teton Village effluent as a single contaminant, measured
    as the sum of nitrate-nitrogen and ammonia-nitrogen. This approach
    implies that all ammonia-nitrogen in the injected effluent is eventually
    converted to nitrate. Typically, the concentration of ammonia/nitrate
    nitrogen in the effluent approaches or exceeds the EPA interim primary
    drinking water standard for nitrate, which is 10 milligrams per liter
    (mg/L) as nitrogen. It is conceivable, therefore, that the injection of
    Teton Village effluent could render the receiving ground-water
    unsuitable for domestic purposes near the injection wells.
    Effect of Injection on Ground Water
    The nine monitor wells whose locations are shown on Figure 6-1 were
    installed by various methods in 1978, 1980 and 1981. Monitor well OH-10
    is the only well installed in 1978 which is currently being monitored.
    The remaining wells constructed in 1980 and 1981 were permitted with the
    State Engineer's Office. Monthly data exist for these wells, and for
    this report the wells are considered to provide reliable and consistent
    water quality data. Construction and completion details are listed in
    Table 6-5, and a typical well completion is depicted on Figure 6-6.
    Nine wells surrounding the wastewater treatment recharge system are
    currently being monitored. The nine monitor wells are identified as
    0H-4, 0H-10, 0H-11A, 0H-13, 0H-14, 0H-15, 0H-18, OH-19 and 0H-20. Well
    OH-3 was designated an acceptable background or upgradient monitor well;
    119
    [4-157]
    

    -------
    Table 6-5. Construction Details for Monitor Wells, Teton Village Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facility, Teton Village, Wyoming.
    1 tern
    Monitor Wells
    1.	Name and Number
    2.	Location
    3.	Construction Start Date
    Construction Stop Date
    4.	Type of Hell Construction
    5.	First Use Oate
    6.	Hole Depth
    7.	Mole Diameter
    B.	Surface Elevation at Well
    Static Depth
    {After Screen Installation)
    10.	Casing Elevation
    11.	Well Development
    12.	Casing Description
    13.	Grout Depth
    14.	Well Completion
    15.	Screen Type
    16.	Slot Size
    17.	Perforation Interval
    18.	Diameter x Length
    OH-3
    SUI SUi, Section 24.
    T42N, R117W
    Teton County, WY
    1978
    Continuous Flight Auger
    4"
    6301.0
    6301.5
    2)" I D
    Perforated PVC
    OH-10
    SWJ SW1. Section 24
    T42N, R117W
    Teton County, WY
    1978
    Hollow Stem Auger
    28' 4"
    7"
    6292.2
    6296.6
    4" I.D.
    Perforated PVC
    OH-11A
    SEi SWi, Section 24
    T42N, R117W
    Teton County, WY
    4/14/80
    5/10/80
    Cable Tool
    44' ir
    8"
    25'
    6292.4
    8 5/8" New Gage Steel
    ~1-15' / 6 5/8" New
    Gage Steel 53-60'
    0.250" th.
    Screened 15-53'
    40 slot size
    N/A
    

    -------
    Table 6-5. Construction Details for Monitor Wells, Teton Village Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facility. Teton Village, Wyoming (cont'd).
    Item
    Monitor Wells
    19.	Effective Area
    20.	Developed Yield (pumpout)
    21.	Packer Installation
    22.	Screen Installation
    23.	Well Driller
    24.	Land Ownership
    Weber Dri11Ing
    1240 Gregory Lane
    Jackson, WY 83001
    c/i
    to
    

    -------
    Table 6-5. Construction Oetalls for Monitor Wells, Teton V111 age Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facility, Teton Village, Wyoming (cont'd).
    Item
    Monitor Wells
    1.	Name and Number
    2.	Location
    3.	Construction Start Date
    Construction Stop Date
    4.	Type of We 11 Construction
    5.	First Use Date
    6.	Hole Depth
    7.	Hole Diameter
    8.	Surface Elevation at Well
    9.	Static Depth
    (After Screen Installation
    10.	Casing Elevation
    11.	Well Development
    12.	Casing Description
    13.	Grout Depth
    14.	Well Completion
    15.	Screen Type
    16	Slot Sue
    17.	Perforation Interval
    OH-13
    HE! NWJ, Section 25
    T42N, RU7W
    Teton County, WY
    5/11/80
    5/20/80
    Cable Tool
    30' 3"
    6"
    22'
    6288.2
    6 5/8" New Gage Steel
    1 -60*3" / 0.250" th.
    11" x 3/8" mills
    perforations 13-36'
    No UelI Screen
    No Gravel Pack
    11" x 3/8" mi 1 Is
    perfoiations, 3 holes/ft
    fl/A
    13' - 36'
    011-14
    HE) NWJ, Section 26
    T42N, R117W
    Teton County, Wlf
    5/21/80
    6/5/80
    Cable Tool
    34' 11"
    6"
    24 1
    6291.5
    6 5/8" New Gage Steel
    M-50'3" / 0.250 th.
    H" x 3/8" mills
    perforations 15-34'
    No Well Screen
    No Gravel Pack
    11" x 3/8" mills
    perforations, 3 holes/ft
    M/A
    15' - 34'
    OH-15
    SU1, SEJ Section 24
    T42N. R117W
    Teton County, WY
    4/14/80
    6/4/B0
    Cable Tool
    41" 4"
    6"
    20'
    6288.6
    6 5/8" New Gage Steel
    *1-50' / 0.250 th.
    11" x 3/8" mills
    perforations 15-38'
    No Well Screen
    No Gravel Pack
    11" x 3/8" mills
    perforations, 3 holes/ft
    N/A
    15'
    38'
    

    -------
    Table 6-5. Construction Details for Monitor Wells, Teton Village Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facility, Teton Village, Wyoming (cont'd).
    I tern
    Monitor Wells
    IB.	Diameter x Length
    19.	Effective Area
    20.	Developed Yield (pumpout)
    21.	Packer Installation
    22.	Screen Installation
    23.	Well Driller
    Weber Drilling
    1240 Gregory Lane
    Jackson, UY 83001
    Weber Drilling
    1240 Gregory Lane
    Jackson. UY 63001
    Weber Drilling
    1240 Gregory Lane
    Jackson. WY B3001
    24. Land Ownership
    Snake River Associates
    Snake River Associates
    Snake River Associates
    

    -------
    Table 6-5. Construction Details for Monitor Wells, Teton Village Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facility, Teton Village, Wyoming (cont'd).
    I tern
    Monitor Wells
    1.	Name and Number
    2.	Location
    3.	Construction Start Date
    Construction Stop Date
    4.	Type of Wei) Construction
    6. First Use Date
    6.	Hole Depth
    7.	Hole Diameter
    8.	Surface Elevation at Well
    9.	Static Depth
    (After Screen Installation)
    10.	Casing Elevation
    11.	Well Development
    12.	Casing Description
    13.	Grout Depth
    14.	Well Completion
    15.	Screen Type
    OH-18
    NEI NWi, Section 25
    T42N, R117W
    Teton County, WY
    9/23/81
    9/24/81
    Air Rotary
    9/23/81
    53' 4"
    4"
    6289.99
    9/23/82
    7'
    6288.47
    Water Surge
    New PVC Sch. 80
    4" 0
    12' Bentonite
    Gravel Pack 10' Below
    Surface to Bottom
    Perf. Casing
    1/8" (t holes, 6 per row,
    rows 6" o.c. vertically
    OH-19
    NE1 NWi, Section 25
    T42N, R117W
    Teton County, WY
    9/21/81
    9/23/81
    Air Rotary
    9/24/81
    52' 3"
    4"
    6286.01
    9/24/82
    7"
    6287.89
    Water Surge
    New PVC Sch. 80
    4" i
    10' Bentonite
    Gravel Pack 10' Below
    Surface to 20'
    Below Surface
    Perf. Casing
    1/8" t holes, 6 per row,
    rows 6" o.c. vertically
    0H-20
    NWi NE ft, Section 25
    T42N, R117W
    Teton County,
    9/25/81
    9/28/81
    Air Rotary
    9/25/81
    50' 4"
    4"
    6284.82
    9/25/82
    7'
    6286.55
    Water Surge
    New PVC Sch. 80
    4" t>
    0.250" th.
    5' Bentonite
    Gravel Pack 5' Below
    Surface to Bottom
    Perf. Casing
    1/8 t holes, 6 per row,
    rows 6" o.c. vertically
    16 Slot Size
    11/A
    N/A
    N/A
    

    -------
    Table 6-5. Construction Details for Monitor Wells, Teton Village Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facility, Teton Village, Wyoming (cont'd).
    Item
    Monitor Wells
    17.	Perforation Interval
    18.	Diameter x Length
    19.	Effective Area
    20.	Developed Yield (Pumpout)
    21.	Packer Installation
    22.	Screen Installation
    23.	Well Driller
    14" - 511
    4" * 52.5'
    N/A
    N/A
    N/A
    Predrl1 led
    Andrew Well Drilling
    1268 E 17th
    Idaho Falls, 10 83401
    14" - 52'
    4" x 53.5*
    N/A
    N/A
    N/A
    Predrllled
    Andrew Well Drilling
    1268 E 17th
    Idaho Falls, ID 83401
    5' - 51*
    4" x 53.7'
    N/A
    N/A
    N/A
    Predrllled
    Andrew Well Drilling
    1268 E 17th
    Idaho Falls. ID 83401
    24. Land Ownership
    Snake River Ranch
    Snake River Ranch
    Snake River Ranch
    

    -------
    it was plugged and abandoned, and was subsequently replaced by well
    OH-4. Samples from OH-4 are collected, analyzed and reported only when
    ground-water levels are high enough and sufficient water is present in
    the well to allow sampling. Data from all other identified monitor
    wells located downgradient of the Teton Village Wastewater Treatment and
    Disposal Facility are collected, analyzed and reported monthly,
    quarterly and annually, depending on the well and parameter. Monitoring
    includes measuring water levels and collecting samples for analyses.
    Sampling is performed according to procedures established and/or
    approved by WQD.
    The monitor wells are used to monitor background and down-gradient
    ground water to provide early detection of any contaminants which may be
    injected at the Teton Village Wastewater Treatment and Disposal
    Facility. The facility permit provides two sets of constituent
    concentration limits for water quality in monitoring wells OH-18, OH-19,
    and 0H-20. If the lower concentration limit is exceeded for any
    constituent in any of these monitoring wells, the permit directs that
    the permittee shall institute actions to reduce the amount of that
    constituent in the discharge. Exceedence of any of the upper
    concentration limits in these wells is considered a violation of the
    permit. For the remainder of this chapter, when permit limits are
    referred to, they will be the upper constituent concentration limits in
    the permit.
    Ground-water monitoring data for well OH-18, which is typical of
    data from the downgradient wells, is shown on Figures 6-13 through 6-16.
    The chemical constituent concentrations shown on the figures are
    126
    [4-164]
    

    -------
    FIGURE 6-13
    AMMONIA CONCENTRATIONS IN OH-18
    J
    \
    o»
    £
    n
    z
    o
    z
    Id
    U
    z
    o
    o
    S
    z
    o
    2
    2
    <
    9.00
    4.00 -
    3.00
    PERUr
    2.00 -
    1.00 -
    o.oo -|—|—i—|—i—i—i—|—i—i	1—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—r
    Jan—#1 Aug—SI F»b—82 3«p—82 Uar—53 Oat—S3 Apr— 84 Nav-84 Jun-83 D*a—83 Jul—OS
    MONTH OF OPERATION
    _l
    \
    a
    E
    z
    o
    p
    <
    e
    z
    u
    o
    z
    o
    o
    i
    12.00
    ti.oo H
    10.00	-
    PERM)
    9.00	-
    8.00	-
    7.00	-
    <.00
    3.00
    4.00	-
    3.00	-
    2.00	-
    1.00
    UMIT
    FIGURE 6-14
    NITRATE CONCENTRATIONS IN OH-18
    
    o.oo i—i—i i i r i i i i r i i i y i i i
    Jan—81 Aug—81 F«6—82 Sap—82 Mar—83 Oat—83 Apr-U Kov— 84 Jun—#4 D*o— 88 Jul—85
    MONTH Of OPERATION
    127
    [4-155]
    

    -------
    s
    E
    w
    n
    z
    o
    z
    y
    o
    z
    o
    o
    o
    z
    u
    z
    FIGURE 6-15
    PHENOLS CONCENTRATIONS IN OH-18
    0.070
    0.080
    0.030 -
    0.040
    0.030
    PERMIT
    0.020 -
    0.010
    0.000
    Jan—81 Aug—flt Fab—82 Sap—82 Mar— U Od—U Api—84 Nov— 84 Jun—83 0*«—83 Jul—88
    MONTH OF OPERATION
    \
    a
    E
    z
    o
    z
    hi
    a
    z
    o
    u
    Ul
    n
    K
    O
    12.00
    11.00 -
    10.00
    PERuit uurr
    9.00	-
    8.00
    7.00	H
    8.00
    5.00	-
    4.00	-
    5.00	-
    2.00	-
    1.00	-
    0.00
    FIGURE 6-16
    OIL * CREASE CONCENTRATIONS IN OH-18
    EC
    i i i i i P i i i i "t1 i i i i i i—r
    Jan-81 Aug—81 Fab-82 S*p-82 Uoi^83 Ocf-83 Apr-H Nov-84 Jun-8S Dm-88 Jui-88
    MONTH Of OPERATION
    128
    [4-156}
    

    -------
    ammonia, nitrate, phenols, and oil and grease. The figures show that
    permit requirements have not been complied with on occasion. Although
    not shown on any of the figures, concentrations of chloride, aluminum,
    and magnesium have also sporadically exceeded permit limits.
    One area of concern to the Teton Village Water and Sewer District
    has been the distance that exists between their operator-controlled
    effluent injection location and the OH wells. Their concern is that
    water quality is not monitored at the point of injection, but at points
    removed from the District's control and susceptible to influences other
    than their discharge. Possible outside influences include the facts
    that some OH wells are located in a cattle pasture and that the
    residential area immediately upgradient from the treatment and disposal
    facility contains numerous septic tanks. Surface drainage ditches have
    been noted within 10 feet or less of monitor wells OH-18 and 0H-20.
    Monitor wells OH-18 and OH-13 are both in close proximity to stagnant
    surface water.
    In summary, the effluent being injected at the Teton Wastewater
    Treatment and Disposal Facility receives tertiary treatment and is
    of a quality which generally does not exceed EPA Interim Primary-
    Drinking Water Standards. Upon injection, the flow rate of the local
    ground water system is so great (4.9 gallons per day per square foot of
    cross-sectional area of the aquifer) that the effluent is dispersed
    through the permeable alluvium and diluted to such an extent that it is
    questionable whether monitored ground-water parameters are entirely
    attributable to the Teton Village recharge wells.
    129
    [4-1S7]
    

    -------
    Model Description and Sensitivity Analysis
    An analytic model of the dispersion of a contaminant plume was used
    to predict the impact of the Teton Village recharge wells on the local
    ground-water system. The model, developed by Allen (1985), provides an
    approximate analytic solution resulting from constant injection by a
    fully penetrating source. The equation as presented by Allen (1985) and
    modified to correct printing errors (J.L. Wilson, personal
    communication, June 1986) is as follows:
    fm exp(x/B)
    C = 1.603 x 104 	 W[u , (r/B]
    4irnm(D 0 )1/2
    v x y'
    in which:
    D = a V	D' = 0 /R.
    XX	X X t
    D = a V	D' = D /R.
    y y	y y t
    B = 2Dx/V	V' = V/R
    T = 1 + (2BX/V)
    u = r2/(4yD't)
    ttB, /?	-(r/B) + 2u
    W[u,(r/B)] = (	) exp [-(r/B)] erfc[	],
    2r	2U1/2
    and where:
    C = the concentration of the substance in solution in parts
    per mi 11 ion (ppm)
    m = the aquifer thickness or an estimate of the plume
    thickness, in ft.
    f = mass injection rate of pollutant, in lbs/day.
    x = distance along axis parallel to regional ground-water
    flow and with positive direction in the direction of flow,
    in ft.
    130
    [4-
    

    -------
    y = horizontal distance perpendicular to and measured from
    the X axis, in ft.
    ax = longitudinal dispersivity (in direction of flow), in ft.
    a^ = transverse dispersivity (perpendicular to flow), in ft.
    R. = retardation factor due to ion exchange or adsorption; a
    factor equal to or greater than one, dimensionless
    g = decay constant in days"*. This factor is zero when there
    is no decay
    V = the uniform ground-water flow velocity in the positive x
    direction, ft/day. This velocity is equal in magnitude
    to Kl/n where K is the hydraulic conductivity, ft/day, I
    is the slope of the free water table, dimensionless, and
    n is defined next
    n = the aquifer porosity, dimensionless
    4	3
    1.603 x 10 = the conversion factor from lbs/ft to ppm
    Parameters used as input to the model include longitudinal
    dispersivity, transverse dispersivity, ground-water velocity, thickness
    and porosity of the aquifer, pollutant loading rate, decay constant and
    pollutant retardation (factors describing pollutant concentration
    attenuation due to such phenomena as adsorption, ion exchange and
    biochemical reation).
    Assumptions behind the foregoing equations are: the flow is
    uniform and unlimited in lateral extent, mixing in the vertical is
    complete, molecular diffusion is negligible, the function W(u,r/B)
    contains an argument greater than 1, and the flow regime is entirely
    saturated. Where more than one source exists, the superposition of
    plumes is assumed to be appropriate. The pollutant is assumed to be
    completely soluble (Allen, 1985).
    131
    [4-159]
    

    -------
    The model's assumptions are met to a degree that will allow the
    modeling to generate reasonably reliable results. The nature of the
    sediments is such that uniform, areally extensive lateral flow can be
    presumed, the velocity of the ground water makes molecular diffusion
    negligible, and the flow regime is entirely saturated. Calculations
    indicate that vertical mixing of the pollutant load through the
    saturated zone should be complete beyond a distance of about 3,000 feet
    from the recharge wells, so beyond that distance from the site the
    modeled results should mimic the real world.
    The model used a nitrogen loading factor of nitrate-nitrogen plus
    ammonia-nitrogen as an indicator of the spread of the contaminant plume
    downgradient from the recharge wells. Nitrogen was chosen because of
    the frequency with which the ammonia/nitrate-nitrogen concentration in
    the effluent approaches or exceeds the EPA interim primary drinking
    water standard for nitrate.
    For this situation, the pollutant retardation factor was assumed to
    be 1.0, indicating no attenuation. This is in keeping with the above
    discussion of nitrogen pollutant species and the very large ground-water
    velocities existing in the area, and results in a conservative model.
    Other model input are:
    Longitudinal Dispersivity, 50 ft.
    Transverse Dispersivity, 10 ft.
    Ground Water Velocity, 30 ft/day
    Aquifer Thickness, 50 ft.
    Aquifer Porosity, 0.35
    Loading Rate, 6.56 lbs/day; and
    Decay constant, 0.0
    132
    [4-170]
    

    -------
    These parameters are also quite conservative with respect to the local
    "ground-water situation. Longitudinal and transverse dispersivities were
    not available for the sediments at the site, so values representative of
    Recent alluvium and outwash were used. Values of both parameters were
    varied in the model sensitivity analysis, and it was shown that the
    representative values used gave a conservative estimate of the nitrogen
    plume migration. The ground water velocity was calculated from existing
    hydraulic gradient and hydraulic conductivity data, and an assumed
    porosity of 0.35, which is typical of the type of sediments present at
    the site. The aquifer thickness was taken as the depth of the injection
    zone, and the loading rate was assigned the average injection rate of
    ammonia-nitrogen plus nitrate-nitrogen. The decay constant of 0.0 is
    for non-radioactive species.
    The model generates results in terms of concentrations of the
    parameter of interest at selected coordinates downgradient from the
    pollutant source. In this case, those results are the increase in
    nitrate-nitrogen concentrations over background.
    Input parameters were varied to assess the sensitivity of the
    model, particularly the values of parameters that were estimated for
    this site. The input parameters that were varied include porosity,
    aquifer thickness, dispersivities, ground-water velocities and pollutant
    loading. Of these parameters, only the pollutant loading was known; the
    remaining parameters were estimated for input to the model.
    The value of porosity was varied from 0.15 to 0.50; the model used
    a value of 0.35, as the range of porosity values applicable to the area
    is small, between 0.25 and 0.40. Pollutant concentrations in the plume
    133
    [4-171]
    

    -------
    were found to vary inversely and linearly with changes in porosity.
    The effect of porosity on the pollutant concentrations is small.
    Aquifer thickness had an effect similar to porosity, and the value
    of 50 feet was used because of the injection well completion depths and
    because it would give a conservative result in modeling.
    The aquifer thickness probably increases rapidly to the east of Teton
    Village, but vertical expansion of the contaminant plume would not be as
    rapid. Pollutant concentrations to the east and southeast of Teton
    Village would likely be lower than predicted by the model because of
    increased aquifer thickness.
    Pollutant loading had a direct and linear effect on concentrations
    in the plume. The pollutant loading was calculated from the monthly
    records of the quantity and quality of effluent injected, which were
    submitted to WQD by the permittee.
    Dispersivities and ground-water velocity were also varied
    separately in the sensitivity analysis. The velocity affected both the
    length and width of the plume, as well as pollutant concentrations
    within the plume. The effect on concentrations and lateral spreading
    was inverse but not linear, as the velocity term occurs in several
    places in the model equations. A greater velocity results in the
    contaminant traveling greater distances but in smaller concentrations.
    Ground-water velocity was varied from 10 ft/day to 50 ft/day. The value
    of 30 ft/day was retained, as it give a conservative estimate of plume
    distribution. Dispersivities, both longitudinal and transverse and the
    ratio between the two values, were varied over an order of magnitude in
    the sensitivity analysis. Longitudinal dispersivity was varied from 10
    134
    [4-172]
    

    -------
    feet to 100 feet, and transverse dispersivity was varied from 1.15 feet
    to 50 feet. The results showed that the value of transverse
    dispersivity (ay) controlled the pollutant concentrations along the
    longitudinal axis of the plume more strongly than did the longitudinal
    dispersivity 
    -------
    require additional calibration data at greater distances downgradient
    from the facility.
    Figure 6-17 shows the results of modeling nitrogen loading at the
    present rate. The figure indicates that at a distance of 7,500 feet
    downgradient from the injection wells the increase in total nitrogen
    concentration is only 0.7 mg/1 after 10 years of injection. This
    result indicates that the present injection from the Teton Village
    sewage treatment facility has no significant adverse impact on the local
    ground water. This conclusion is not unexpected, since a permit was
    issued by the WDEQ-WQD for the injection wells, and no major problems
    (other than the previously described problem with phenol in the
    effluent) have been indicated by the results of sampling and analysis of
    ground water from the monitoring wells.
    Model Results
    The model was also used to predict the minimum nitrogen loading
    that would cause the nitrate-nitrogen standard of 10 mg/L to be exceeded
    downgradient from the recharge facility. The results indicated that the
    total ammonia-nitrogen plus nitrate-nitrogen load could be safely
    doubled from the present average for about 1 year without causing the 10
    mg/L standard to be exceeded at distances greater than 100 feet from the
    facility. However, continuation of that same loading rate would cause
    the standard to be exceeded within five years. The maximum loading rate
    considered safe for the long term (10 to 20 years), based on the model's
    predictions, is about 50 percent above the present average loading rate.
    As cautioned earlier, however, any planning or regulatory decisions
    136
    [4-174]
    

    -------
    should be based on more detailed modeling than was conducted for this
    report.
    Summary
    The injection of treated wastewater from Teton Village into the
    local ground water is not causing violation of any of the Standards of
    Class I Wyoming ground waters. The lack of such violation is
    attributable to:
    1.	The high level of wastewater treatment afforded by the Teton
    Village sewage treatment facility, and resulting high quality
    of injected effluent;
    2.	The nature of the local ground-water system; a thick alluvial
    injection receiver which features extremely good quality water
    and very high ground-water flow rates for dilution of the
    effluent; and
    3.	The permit requirements of the WDEQ-WQD, which require the
    Teton Village Water and Sewer District to routinely monitor
    the quality of injected effluent and ground water in nearby
    monitoring wells, thus requiring the Company's continued
    attention to maintenance of the treatment plant and injection
    system.
    The major environmental question concerning the future of the Teton
    Village wastewater effluent injection is the possibility of increased
    use of the ground water in this area for both water supply and disposal
    of treated wastewater. The only apparent way to adequately regulate
    this situation is by careful application of the requirements contained
    138
    [4-175.
    

    -------
    in Chapters VIII and IX of the Wyoming Water Quality Rules and
    Regulations. It has not been explicitly stated thus far, but future
    wastewater injection projects in this area will probably require more
    extensive modeling of the ground water. The results of such modeling
    will be needed to determine whether to allow aaditional projects of this
    kind in the Jackson Hole area (or elsewhere), and to develop appropriate
    permit limitations and conditions for such projects. This in turn will
    require the collection of more complete baseline data and the
    installation of monitoring wells which are completed in a standardized
    manner.
    Additionally, if future projects of this type are undertaken in
    this area, a standardized method of data input, storage and retrieval
    will be necessary to make realistic use of the monitoring data which are
    gathered and submitted by permittees as part of their operations. Lack
    of such a standard database makes it difficult to use the monitoring
    data which is presently submitted by the Teton Village Water and Sewer
    District.
    Conclusions
    The Teton Village recharge wells do not cause any significant
    degradation of ground-water quality. The small impact is due to the
    high degree of effluent treatment afforded by the Teton Village
    Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facility, and the dilution of the
    effluent by the high-quality ground water into which the effluent is
    injected.
    139
    [4-176]
    

    -------
    The results of this assessment, while specific only to the Teton
    Village recharge wells, can be modified for general application to
    similar facilities and settings. The Teton Village facility generates
    only domestic sewage effluent, and does not handle substances which are
    difficult or impossible to treat conventionally. Such substances as
    phenols, chlorinated hydrocarbons and polynuclear aromatics are more
    typically generated by industrial facilities than by residential or
    resort-area developments.
    Industrial development would be unlikely in a setting like that of
    Teton Village, where the site overlies a shallow aquifer with
    exceptionally good water quality. These waters are rare outside
    mountainous areas with glacial outwash or Precambrian aquifers.
    Residential or resort-type development would be the norm for alpine
    settings, and injection well disposal of tertiary-treated effluent would
    likely present only a small hazard. Careful stipulation of ground water
    pollution control permit conditions to require close monitoring of
    system operation, effluent quality, and downgradient water quality would
    minimize any degradation of ground-water quality.
    The conditions to the Teton Village Ground-Water Pollution Control
    permit contain sufficient stipulations regarding operation of the system
    and ground-water and effluent quality monitoring, that significant
    water-quality impacts will be avoided if the permit conditions are
    adhered to by the operators. The shortcomings of baseline hydrologic
    data mentioned earlier in this chapter developed because the permitting
    system for facilities such as this was not fully developed when the
    Teton Village facility was undergoing development in the mid-1970's.
    140
    [4-177]
    

    -------
    Enforcement of the regulations presently in place, and careful review
    and response by WDEQ-WQD to proposals for similar development should
    adequately protect receiver units.
    141
    [4-173]
    

    -------
    SECTION 4.3.6
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (or SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    AUTHOR:
    (or INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION:
    "Waste-Water Injection: Geochemical and
    Biochemical Clogging Processes", Ground
    Water, Vol. 23, No. 6
    June A. Oberdorfer and Frank L. Peterson
    November-December, 1985
    Oahu, Hawaii, USEPA Region IX
    Site A: Waimanalo Wastewater Treatment Plant, Waimanalo
    Site B: Paalaa Kai Wastewater Treatment Plant, Waialua
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES:
    Wastewater treatment
    Two experimental injection sites
    were installed in order to study
    clogging that occurs in the near
    vicinity of wells used for
    injection of treated sewage
    effluent.	Numerous data,
    including injection head
    distribution, analyses of sediment
    cores taken from injection strata,
    and analyses of water collected
    from the injection strata (pore
    water), were studied. Results
    showed that filtration of
    suspended solids is not a long-
    term cause of clogging.
    Particulate filtration may be a
    short-term cause of clogging, but
    the injected organics are
    biodegraded once the microbial
    mass becomes established.
    [4-179]
    

    -------
    Waste-Water Injection: Geochemical and
    Biogeochemical Clogging Processes
    by June A. Oberdorfera and Frank L. Peterson1*
    ABSTRACT
    Examination of near-well clogging processes at two
    experimental injection sites in Hawaii shows that filtration
    of suspended solids is not a long-term cause of clogging
    While paniculate filtration is probably a short-term cause of
    clogging at the start-up of injection, the injected organics
    are biodegraded once the microbial biomass becomes
    established The injection head gradient determined from
    monitoring wells shows that most of the initial head loss is
    immediately adjacent to the well, but that after several
    weeks it shifts to a region over 0 5 m from the well
    Denitrifying bacteria become sufficiently numerous to
    produce significant amounts of nitrogen gas, which in turn
    produces a gas-bound zone about 0 5 to 1 m from the well
    With continued injection the nitrogen gas-bound zone is
    slowlv extended farther out into the injection stratum
    Dissolution of the carbonate aquifer also occurs, but its
    effects are partially masked by gas binding
    INTRODUCTION
    Waste-water disposal into injection wells
    almost inevitably produces aquifer clogging and
    reduced injection capacity In Hawaii, overflows
    from wells injecting secondary treated sewage
    effluent have created numerous public health,
    legal, and financial problems. To determine the
    causes of clogging, geochemical and biogeochemi-
    2Assistant Professor of Hydrogeology, San Jose State
    University, San Jose, California 95192
    bProfessor of Hydrogeology, Department of Geology
    & Geophysics, and Researcher, Water Resources Research
    Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii
    96822
    Received July 1984, accepted May 1985
    Discussion open until May 1, 1986
    Vol 23, No 6—GROUND WATER—November-December 1985
    cal processes that occur in the near vicinity of the
    injection well were examined utilizing observation
    well and sediment core and pore-water analyses
    Although injection wells are widely used in
    the United States and throughout the world for
    waste disposal and artificial recharge, few detailed
    investigations of injection well clogging processes
    have been reported Probably the most compre-
    hensive study is a compilation by Olsthoorn (1982)
    of clogging problems associated with recharge
    wells. Other studies most pertinent to this work are
    examination of injection well problems in Hawaii
    by Petty and Peterson (1979), aquifer clogging
    caused by the injection of primary treated sewage
    effluent at Richmond, California (California Water
    Pollution Control Board, 1954), and clogging at
    Bay Park, New York as a result of injection of
    tertiary treated sewage effluent (Ehrlich et al,
    1972; Ehrlich et al, 1977,Ragone, 1977,
    Vecchioli and Ku, 1972, Vecchioli et al . 1980)
    The most significant conclusions from these studies
    are the following
    1. The major cause of clogging at most of
    these sites is filtration by the porous media of
    suspended solids contained within the injectant
    2	The second major cause of clogging results
    from microbial growth at the well face and within
    the aquifer
    3	Of lesser significance are chemical precipi-
    tation processes
    4	On occasion, clogging may result from
    entrapped air and gas bubbles introduced by the
    injectant
    5	Most of the clogging activity occurs at or
    very near the injection well-aquifer boundary, and
    [4-130
    753
    

    -------
    in many instances a mat of filtration material
    forms directly on the aquifer surface
    The above conclusions were the preconcep-
    tions with which we commenced this study. As our
    research developed, they proved to be less relevant
    to the Hawaiian injection environment than
    originally thought. Other processes, particularly
    biogenic nitrogen gas binding, appear to be more
    important for well clogging in the Hawaiian
    injection situations studied.
    DESCRIPTION OF FIELD SITES
    AND EXPERIMENTS
    Despite the recognition that clogging occurs
    in the near vicinity of the well, no previous investi-
    gations have examined sediment samples or pore
    water taken from the injection formation within
    the first few meters of the well The nearest
    observation wells are generally located several
    meters from the injection well To obtain more
    direct evidence of the processes occurring in this
    very near-well environment, two experimental
    injection sites were installed and numerous data
    were collected and analyzed The most useful of
    these included measurements of injection head
    distribution, analyses of sediment cores taken from
    the injection strata, and analyses of water collected
    from the injection strata (pore water)
    The experimental sites were selected to dupli-
    cate as closely as possible the general conditions at
    operating Hawaiian injection sites Most disposal
    wells in the Hawaiian Islands inject secondary-
    treated sewage effluent into coastal plain aquifers
    consisting of marine carbonate and alluvial sedi-
    ments or highly permeable basaltic flows, all gener-
    ally saturated with brackish water The wells range
    typically in diameter from 0 10 to 0 15 m, are less
    than about 30 m deep, and have injection rates less
    than 6.3 X 10~3 m3/s per well. The injection experi-
    ments described were all conducted into a fine
    carbonate sand aquifer (YVaimanalo) and a coral
    reef and rubble aquifer (Paalaa Kai).
    Site A
    This site is located on the grounds of the
    Waimanalo Wastewater Treatment Plant at
    Waimanalo, Oahu, Hawaii The injection formation
    at this site is a fine to medium carbonate sand layer
    approximately 3 m thick, overlain by a dense
    impermeable clay layer and underlain by a low-
    permeability clayey coral rubble layer. The
    hydraulic conductivity of the sand layers was
    determined by pump testing to be about 3 5 X 10~4
    m/s This formation, which is representative of
    754
    some of the least permeable receiving formations
    available for waste disposal in Hawaii, was selected
    for these experiments because of its susceptibility
    to clogging Five injection wells, three of 0 10 m
    diameter and two of 0 15 m diameter, were
    utilized for injection experiments. All of the
    injection wells were cased with PVC pipe and
    slotted throughout their entire length. Figure 1
    shows the location of injection wells, observation
    wells, and sampling sites. Figure 2 shows a hydro-
    geologic cross section through the three wells
    where sediment samples were collected
    The injectant was secondary treated domestic
    sewage which contained BODs averaging about 10
    to 15 mg/e, suspended solids of 5 to 15 mg/£, and
    total chlorine residual of 1.5 mg/fi. Injection
    experiments were conducted from May 1980 to
    June 1982 Sediment cores were taken adjacent to
    Well 4-5 in October 1980 after five months of
    injection, and additional cores were collected at
    Wells 4-4 and 6-2 in April 1981 Observation wells
    were installed in each of these latter coring sites
    Cores were taken at 0 3, 0 6, and 0 9m from the
    injection well and at depths of 2.4 and 2.7 m
    below ground surface.
    Site B
    This site is located on the grounds of the
    Paalaa Kai Wastewater Treatment Plant, Waialua,
    Oahu, Hawaii. The injection formation is a 3 m
    thick layer of coral and recemented reef rubble
    lying at a depth of 11 to 14 m below ground
    surface. This formation is much more permeable
    than the one at Waimanalo and has a hydraulic
    conductivity of about 0.01 m/s. It is representative
    Fig. 1. Waimanalo experimental well layout and sampling
    sites, Oahu.
    
    

    -------
    CLAYEY
    COMAL
    NUBBLE
    Mam ««llt slotted
    | olon, entire l.«,th	*	«"•	(no v.,t,C0l e«o„ero.,On>
    I
    | Slotted section of cotmq
    Fig. 2. Cross section at Site A Waimanalo Wells 4-4, 4-5, 6-2, including observation wells and sampling sites.
    1	2 m
    of some of the better sedimentary receiving forma-
    tions on Oahu. One injection well (PK-1) and three
    observation wells (at 0.6, 1.3, and 2.0 m from the
    injection well) were used. Like the Waimanalo
    wells, PK-1 is cased with 0.10 m PVC casing slotted
    throughout its entire length. The injectant is of
    excellent quality, having been filtered through a
    rapid sand filter after receiving biological
    secondary treatment. The BOD5 and suspended
    solids averaged less than 5 mg/?. Injection took
    place from July 1981 to June 1982.
    METHODS
    Sediment samples were collected with a hand
    auger. Water from the observation wells was
    sampled at the pump discharge or with a thief
    sampler after sufficient bailing to remove the
    water originally in the well bore. The injectant was
    sampled at the discharge into the well. A complete
    description of chemical analytical methods is given
    in Oberdorfer (1983) or Oberdorfer and Peterson
    (1982). Briefly, sediment analyses included:
    1.	ATP-Biomass Index: Two cc of sediment
    were injected into 10 m2 boiling phosphate buffer
    to extract ATP. Analysis performed on SAI Tech-
    nology Co. ATP Photometer Model 200 (see Karl
    and LaRock, 1975).
    2.	Iron: Sample was ashed at 550° C for 4 hr
    to remove organics. Sample then digested in acids
    in a teflon crucible (see Bernas, 1968). Detection
    by atomic adsorption (APHA et al., 1980), Part
    301A with standard addition.
    3. Organic Carbon: Performed on a Hewlett
    Packard 185-B carbon and nitrogen analyzer (see
    Smith et al., 1981).
    Pore-water samples were obtained with a
    thief sampler except in the case of dissolved
    oxygen which was measured in the well. Analyses
    include:
    1.	Alkalinity: APHA Part 403.
    2.	Chlorides: APHA Part 408A.
    3.	Dissolved Nitrogen (ammonia, nitrate/
    nitrite, total): APHA Part 604 on a Technicon
    Autoanalyzer II after filtration with a 0.45 m
    membrane filter.
    4.	pH: Measured with a Photovolt pH Meter
    126A, calibrated with pH 7 and pH 10 buffer.
    5.	Dissolved Oxygen: Measured with a YSI
    Model 57 Oxygen Meter.
    6.	Dissolved Nitrogen Gas and Methane Gas:
    5 m£ samples taken immediately from the thief
    sampler with a glass syringe; dissolved gas extracted
    into 5 mS of carrier gas (helium) in syringe head
    space during one minute of agitation; head space
    gas then run through gas chromatograph with
    1.8 m by 0.003 m O.D. stainless steel column filled
    with Molecular Sieve 5-A-80/100 and measured
    with thermal conductivity; procedure slightly
    modified from Martens and Van Klump (1980).
    7.	Dissolved Cations (calcium, magnesium,
    strontium): Samples filtered with a 0.45 m
    membrane filter and analyses performed by
    inductively coupled plasma spectroscopy (see Peck
    etal., 1979).
    755
    [4-132]
    

    -------
    DISTANCE FROM WELL (m)
    1/82
    \ 7/81
    O
    O
    <
    U!
    z
    PK
    WELL
    Fig. 3. Specific hydraulic head, Paalaa Kai Well PK-1.
    RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
    Formation Head Distribution
    With a number of observation wells close to
    the injection well, the head distribution within the
    injection stratum in the near vicinity of the well
    can be monitored and its evolution with time
    observed. Figure 3 shows the specific head buildup
    (injection head buildup divided by the injection
    rate) for the site B well at various times during its
    injection history These times included at the
    initial fresh-water injection test, twice shortly after
    the start-up of injection, and twice after prolonged
    periods of injection. The Site A wells showed
    similar patterns
    The head distribution curves for the wells
    indicate that a maturation process occurs in the
    injection stratum over the first several weeks after
    the start-up of injection. The head buildup at the
    time of the fresh-water injection test for each of
    the wells represented a normal appearing cone of
    impression The major head loss was observed
    immediately adjacent to the well and the gradient
    leveled off with distance In the first few days after
    the start-up of injection, head loss increased
    immediately adjacent to the well An increase in
    head loss indicates a decrease in hvdraulic con-
    756
    ductivity, i e , clogging Thus, during the first few
    days of injection, virtually all of the clogging took
    place immediately adjacent to the well and there
    was little indication of any clogging beyond the
    first observation well As injection continued, there
    was a shift outward of the clogging. Although head
    loss remained significant adjacent to the well, a
    marked increase in head loss beyond the first
    observation well was observed after eight days.
    Clogging was now occurring in a zone farther out
    from the injection well. This outward progression
    of clogging proceeded thereafter at a more gradual
    rate Ultimately almost no head loss occurred in
    the zone nearest the well where almost all of the
    initial head loss took place This decreased head
    gradient indicates an increase in permeability over
    initial conditions and may indicate dissolution of
    the porous medium. At all of the observed wells,
    the clogging initially occurred in a zone within
    about 0 5m from the injection well After a few
    weeks to a month of injection, most of the
    clogging occurred in a zone anywhere from 0 7 to
    13m from the injection well
    Figure 3 also shows the effects that redevelop-
    ment can have on head distribution Redevelop-
    ment by acid treatment and pumping after the
    January 1982 observations produced a lower
    specific head and a reduction in head as far out as
    observation well PE2 (0 6 m from the injection
    well) The effects of redevelopment probably
    extend a meter at this site, although in general the
    effectiveness of redevelopment will depend on
    which redevelopment technique is used For this
    well the clogging did not extend beyond 2 m. This
    limit was also true for most of the Site A wells,
    except for one in which the clogging extended well
    beyond 2 m
    Sediment Cores
    Because particulates in the injectant were
    expected to play a major role in clogging, the
    accumulation of particulates in the sediment was
    closely examined Sediment cores were taken from
    the injection strata adjacent to three of the wells at
    Site A, each within a meter of the injection well.
    Figure 4 shows the concentration of several of the
    most significant constituents in the sediment cores
    as a function of distance from the wells As
    described previously, the samples were collected
    after several months of injection so the clogging
    processes were well established The points plotted
    in this figure are averages of analyses of two
    samples collected at slightly different depths at
    each coring site Since multiple analyses were
    frequently performed on each sample, a point
    [4-183]"
    

    -------
    often represents the average of more than two
    data. Depth may affect some processes, particular-
    ly where closeness to the water table might play a
    role; however, no consistent pattern of variation
    with depth was observed. A large variability
    frequently occurs in values obtained for a single
    parameter at a given coring site This is a result of
    the variability found in natural systems, and is
    typical of environmental sampling Microbial
    biomass (measured as ATP) is particularly
    susceptible to environmental variability. To under-
    stand the system, the major trends should be
    observed, rather than focusing on a single
    anomalous result. Background samples were
    collected at three locations relatively far from the
    injection wells and their averages are plotted to the
    right-hand side (Figure 4) for comparison.
    Generally, the sample farthest from the well
    y *
    z o —»
    <5^ °5
    °5 L
    c <
    Oo
    0
    < 30
    X
    UJ
    O ^
    z «
    0." ?
    -3 ?
    2 -
    O
    I 6
    ¦ 3
    en £
    * _
    P<
    ® UJ 9
    i 3
    Z
    O
    <
    2•
    — UJ
    o
    z
    o
    o
    Background
    Levels
    (20,35,60 m)
    
    	well 4-4	Well 4-3
    Well 6-2
    -L.
    0	0 23 0 50 0 ?J 100
    OISTANCE FROM WELL (m)
    Fig. 4. Concentration of selected constituents in sediment
    samples from Site A vs. distance from well.
    (0 80-0 94 m) had concentrations similar to the
    background samples Cores taken closest to the
    well showed the greatest difference from back-
    ground levels. This is to be expected as the
    processes involving particulates are initiated by
    filtration and thus take place immediately adjacent
    to the well.
    Percent organic carbon in the sediment as a
    function of distance from the well revealed a deple-
    tion of organic carbon adjacent to the well This
    depletion was unexpected ; instead an increase in
    organic carbon from accumulation of injected
    particulate matter was expected to occur (the
    injectant has a suspended solids load of 10-15
    mg/8 of which 95% is volatile, i.e , organic)
    Particulates have long been considered to be a
    major cause of clogging, but these data contradict
    that The most probable explanation of the near-
    well depletion is that the microbial population
    metabolizes all of the organic carbon put into the
    system plus, due to the high metabolic rate
    induced near the well, the refractory compounds
    which persist at a greater distance from the well
    Organic carbon concentrations at 1 m are similar to
    background concentrations so there does not
    appear to be an accumulation of particulates that
    have simply travelled farther out into the
    formation
    The microbial biomass (ATP) nearest the well
    is an order of magnitude greater than background
    levels. The large error bars on this plot reflect the
    variability found in environmental samples, how-
    ever, major trends are still clearly discernible
    Injectant ATP levels of 0 5 to 5 ng/m? would not
    account for this biomass accumulation by simple
    filtration. This biomass increase in a nutrient-rich
    environment indicates that most of the metabolism
    of organics occurs very close to the well and is
    consistent with the organic depletion discussed
    above The bacteria at 1 m, while not quantitatively
    significant, are qualitatively significant, particularly
    in mediating redox reactions The injectant chlorine
    residual (averaging 0 5 to 3 0 mg/C) decreases but is
    still detectable at 1 m from the well, yet the
    bacterial community can persist, even fluonsh, in
    the chlorinated environment. They may inhabit
    more protected microenvironments, such as in
    cavities in the sand grain surfaces or at contact
    points between grains, where they would be less
    exposed to continuous contact with the high
    chlorine residual.
    Immediately adjacent to the well, bulk
    density increases markedly due partially to the
    addition of fine particulate matter which can be
    seen in the sediment cores as a brown discoloration
    757
    [4
    

    -------
    at the time of sampling Iron, aluminum, and
    phosphorus also show increases in this region. Part
    of this fine particulate matter is present as iron
    monosulfide. The sulfide is produced by biologically
    mediated sulfate reduction which must occur in
    microenvironments in the porous medium since
    sulfate-reducing bacteria are strict anaerobes and
    could not survive in the aerated bulk pore water
    The hydrogen sulfide quickly reacts with iron in
    the system to form iron monosulfide. The iron
    levels are much greater at the 10-mo sampling
    (Wells 4-4 and 6-2) than at the 5-mo sampling
    (Well 4-5), indicating that this iron accumulation is
    a rate dependent process. Additional iron is present
    in iron-rich clays (typical in Hawaii) which are
    introduced with the injectant and filtered out
    shortly after entering the system
    To summarize, analyses of sediment cores
    indicate that particulate processes occur in the first
    few tens of centimeters from the injection well,
    but at a distance of a meter away there is little to
    distinguish the sediments in the injection stratum
    from background samples. An increase in biomass
    occurs adjacent to the well where there is a high
    nutrient influx, but it does not appear to be
    massive enough to be a major cause of clogging
    This is supported by detailed microscopic examina-
    tion of the sediment cores and by the injection
    head data described earlier. In the first days after
    injection start-up, head increased immediately
    adjacent to the well, probably because particulate
    organics accumulated there before the microbial
    population became well enough established to
    consume all of the incoming particulates. It should
    be remembered, however, that after a few weeks
    the zone of high head loss, and hence clogging,
    shifted farther outward from the injection well
    (Figure 3). We think this occurred when the micro-
    bial population became well enough established
    after the first few weeks to metabolize the organics
    which had accumulated near the well, thus reducing
    the clogging there. To be sure, deposition of fine
    particulate matter, as indicated by the bulk density
    increase, was observed adjacent to the well
    throughout the injection experiments However,
    the deposition was not massive enough to
    substantially increase clogging, and the loss of
    permeability caused by the addition of these
    particulates seems to be overshadowed by dissolu-
    tion of the carbonate aquifer Thus the results
    from our work suggest that although clogging by
    particulate matter may be important tor the first
    few weeks of injection, it apparently is not a major
    contributor over the long run
    758
    Pore Water
    Analysis of the sediment cores has mainly
    indicated what does not cause clogging. To deter-
    mine what is causing the clogging, it is necessary to
    examine the pore waters taken directly from the
    injection stratum. Thus, pore-water samples were
    collected several different times and analyzed for
    over 25 different constituents. Given here is a
    summary of only the most significant results. The
    complete data set is available in Oberdorfer (1983)
    All of the pore-water data presented in this
    paper were collected after extended periods of
    injection During this time chloride levels in the
    formation water in the near vicinity of the wells
    (2-20 m) were identical to the levels in the
    injectants and significantly lower than chlorides in
    the native ground water prior to the start-up of
    injection. Since chloride is a conservative tracer
    whose concentration does not change in the forma-
    tion except by mixing with waters of different
    chloride concentration, the results indicate that the
    effluent has displaced all of the ground water in
    the vicinity of the well, and dilution effects cannot
    account for changes in formation water quality
    Figure 5 shows the concentration of several
    key pore-water constituents versus distance from
    the injection well (zero distance represents the
    injected effluent). Since the injectant quality can
    be highly variable, concentrations are expressed in
    terms of changes from input concentrations, as the
    changes in water quality reflect the processes
    occurring. Additional wells sampled at Site A
    showed similar trends The error bars are in large
    part a reflection of sample variability for different
    sampling times, often a result of injectant concen-
    tration variability. Again, major trends rather than
    details should be noted. The data from Figure 5
    suggest that there are two processes of major
    significance to clogging which occur immediately
    adjacent to injection wells. The first of these is
    dissolution of the carbonate aquifer material, a
    process that actually decreases rather than
    increases clogging potential. The injectant is mildly
    acidic which contributes to carbonate dissolution.
    In addition, bacterial metabolism of the injected
    organics consumes oxygen (see decrease in
    dissolved oxygen with distance from well in
    Figure 5) and produces carbon dioxide and water
    which rapidly convert to carbonic acid. Carbonic
    acid dissociates to bicarbonate and hydrogen ions
    in the pH range in question, as shown by
    equation (1)
    CH,0 + O, = CO, +H;0 = H:C03 = HCO"3 + H* (1
    [4-185
    

    -------
    70
    X
    a
    200 -
    Z 5"t
    3^, '°°h
    < e
    * —
    		-o
    ^	„o
    			
    40 -
    £ 5_
    >Doi
    §0
    §5-
    o
    UJ Z —
    >U|o(
    62 »
    x E
    5 °~*
    0 -
    10 -
    s -
    0 -
    Sife A
    Well 4-4
    ~Y"~-
    0 Sz ^
    eg?
    E
    a< ~*
    to < E
    o > o»
    £o~
    <«,
    _j  z
    =>og
    u x
    -< -! O
    < < oe
    12
    15
    10
    140
    O < 3
    "O o
    —  100 -
    z «
    
    •-<3
    
    '--O
    G.^
    
    "XX „
    "N
    "-Ol_
    •-O
    	*
    
    • S>te A
    Well 4-4
    O Site B
    Well PK-1
    0	10	20
    DISTANCE FROM WELL (m)
    Fig. 6. Concentration of nitrogen species in pore water vs.
    distance from well.
    [4-186
    759
    

    -------
    the presence of organic matter, nitrate + nitrite can
    be removed from a system by bacterially mediated
    denitrification producing nitrogen gas, as shown by
    the reaction,
    CHjO + 4/5 NO"3 = 2/5 Nj + HC03 + 1/5 H*+2/5 H20
    .(4)
    Because of the source/sink relationship between
    ammonia and nitrate + nitrite, total dissolved
    nitrogen (TDN) should be considered when evalu-
    ating nitrogen removal from an aqueous system
    The TDN provides a measure of the dissolved
    organic, ammonia, and nitrate + nitrite nitrogen in
    the system, but not the gaseous forms. The TDN
    curves show significant decreases outward from the
    wells, as do the ammonia and nitrate + nitrite
    curves Since nitrogen loss to cation exchange or
    bacterial uptake should be minimal in the quasi-
    steady-state system after one to two years of
    injection, the only reasonable cause for nitrogen
    removal from the TDN is denitrification In
    Well 4-4 most of the decrease takes place in the
    zone between 0 5 3 and 0 91m (the zone where
    most of the clogging occurs), while at PK-1 the de-
    crease appears to occur uniformly over the 2 m
    radial distance monitored
    Nitrogen gas, the end product of denitrifica-
    tion, increases in concentration with distance out-
    ward from the well. The data were somewhat
    erratic due to the difficulty of sampling for
    nitrogen gas without contamination by atmo-
    spheric nitrogen The decrease m TDN, however,
    provides a positive indication for nitrogen gas pro-
    duction by denitrification. Furthermore, methane
    gas was also detected in some of the pore waters at
    site A at concentrations up to 1 5 mg/? Methane
    production occurred primarily in those zones
    where there was a major decrease in TDN.
    Methanogenic bacteria are strict anaerobes and
    produce methane gas only in strongly reducing
    environments Again, this is a strong indication
    that these bacterial reactions take place in micro-
    environments as the methanogenic bacteria could
    not tolerate the oxygen in the bulk pore water It
    also indicates that enough exchange occurs
    between microenwronments and bulk pore water
    for the anaerobic microenvironment processes to
    affect the bulk pore-water quality Thus, while the
    amount of methane detected was small, it is quali-
    tatively significant because, thermodynamicallv,
    denitrification should precede methane produc-
    tion So while methane in itself does not make a
    significant contribution to clogging, its presence is
    important as an indication that denitrification
    reactions are likely to be taking place.
    The injectant was well aerated during treat-
    ment and could expecredly be close to nitrogen gas
    saturation. As nitrogen gas concentration increases
    because of denitrification, the N2 will become
    supersaturated (saturation is approximately
    14 mg/e at pore-water temperature of 25°C and
    pressures found in the injection formation). A
    portion of the nitrogen gas will come out of solu-
    tion and form gas bubbles. The gas bubbles can
    cause gas binding of the porous medium by
    blocking the pores in the same way that a particle
    would Lance and Whisler (1972) and Rice (1974)
    concluded that the major reduction in hydraulic
    conductivity observed in soil columns saturated
    with secondary-treated effluent was caused by
    nitrogen gas binding Nitrogen removal from Lance
    and Whisler's columns averaged 34%, which is
    approximately the amount removed up to the
    farthest-out observation well at both sites.
    Using the total dissolved nitrogen results and
    typical flow rates, crude calculations were made as
    to how fast nitrogen gas production could cause
    clogging of the aquifer. Calculations for Well 4-4
    indicated it would take roughly 60 days for the
    zone between 0 5 and 0 9 m to become completely
    gas bound and about 30 days for its porosity to be
    reduced by 50% Since it is quite likely that some
    of the bubbles escape, these time periods are
    probably too short, but they should give an idea of
    magnitude for the rate at which clogging would
    occur They also match well with the measured
    rates of clogging at this site.
    CONCLUSIONS
    Under the conditions that prevailed during
    this study (injection of secondary-treated sewage
    effluent into carbonate receiving formations) filtra-
    tion of suspended solids does not appear to be a
    long-term cause of clogging, a finding contrary to
    results commonly reported in the literature
    Although filtration was not a long-term cause of
    clogging, it is very likely to have short-term
    clogging effects An interpretation that is consis-
    tent with our data is that in the first days after the
    start-up of effluent injection, the head gradient
    that was observed to increase in the region
    immediately adjacent to the well was most likely
    due to the filtration of injected suspended solids ir
    that region The microbial population was not yet
    established and thus could not biodegrade the
    largely organic injected particulates After the
    bacterial colony established itself over the first few
    [4-187
    

    -------
    weeks of injection, two significant changes that
    affect clogging occurred. First, the bacterial popu-
    lation immediately adjacent to the well metabo-
    lized all of the injected particulate organic matter,
    thus removing much of the clogging from this
    region where all of the clogging initially took place.
    Second, when the denitrifying bacteria became
    sufficiently well established, they produced signifi-
    cant amounts of nitrogen gas, which resulted in a
    gas-bound zone farther out in the aquifer This was
    revealed by the steep head gradient which became
    established over half a meter out from the injection
    well in a zone where there was originally almost no
    head loss. With continued injection, the nitrogen
    gas-bound zone slowly extended farther out into
    the injection stratum Superimposed on this, but
    with its effects masked in part by the gas binding,
    was dissolution of the carbonate porous medium
    The increase in permeability that resulted from
    carbonate dissolution in the non-gas-bound region
    near the well caused the flattening of the head
    gradient immediately adjacent to the injection
    well The high degree of clogging created farther
    out in the aquifer by denitrification overrode the
    permeability increase caused by carbonate dissolu-
    tion, and the wells underwent major losses of injec-
    tion capacity. While this is not the only possible
    scenario for clogging to occur, it is strongly
    supported by repeated patterns at both of the
    injection sites studied and certainly warrants
    further investigation.
    REFERENCES
    American Public Health Association, American Water
    Works Association, and Water Pollution Control
    Federation 1980 Standard Methods for the Exami-
    nation of Water and Wastewater. 15 th ed. APHA,
    A WW A, and WPCF, Washington, D.C.
    Bcrnas, B 1968 A new method for decomposition and
    comprehensive analysis of silicates by atomic
    absorption spectrometry Analytical Chemistry,
    v 40, no 11, pp 1682-1686
    California State Water Pollution Control Board 1954
    Report on the investigation of the travel of pollution.
    Pub No. 11, Sacramento, California
    Ehrlich, G. G , T. A. Ehlke, and J. Vecchtoli. 1972. Micro-
    bial aspects of groundwater recharge—injection of
    purified chlorinated sewage effluent. U.S Geological
    Survey Professional paper 300-B pp B241-B245
    Ehrlich, G G , H.F H Ku, J. Vecchioh, and T. A. Ehlke.
    1977 Microbial effects of recharging the Magothy
    aquifer, Bay Park, New York, with tertiary-treated
    sewage U S. Geological Survey Professional Paper
    751-E.
    Karl, D M md P A LaRock 1975 Adenosine triphos-
    phate measurements in soil and marine sediments J
    Fish Res. Bd Can v. 32, no 5, pp 599-607
    Lance, J C and F D Whisler 1972 Nitrogen balance in
    soil columns intermittently flooded with secondary
    sewage effluent. J of Environ. Qual. v 1, no 2,
    pp. 180-186
    Martens, C. S and J Van Klump 1980 Biochemical
    cycling in an organic-rich coastal marine basin I
    Methane sediment-water exchange processes.
    Geochim Cosmochim. Acta v. 44, no 3, pp 471-
    490
    Oberdorfer, J A 1983. Wastewater injection near-well
    processes and their relationship to clogging Ph D
    dissertation. University of Hawaii at Manoa,
    Honolulu
    Oberdorfer, J A. and F L.Peterson 1982. Wastewater
    injection well problems, processes and standards.
    Tech. Rep No 146, Water Resources Research
    Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu
    Olsthoorn, T N 1982 The clogging of recharge wells, mam
    subject KIWA-communications 72, The Netherlands'
    Testing and Research Institute, Rijswijk, Netherlands
    Peck, E. S , A L. Langhorst, and D W Obrien 1979
    Analysis of natural waters with an automated
    inductivelv-couple plasma spectrometer system
    Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Report
    UCRL-81043, California
    Petty, S and F L Peterson 1979 Hawaiian waste injection
    practices and problems Tech Rep No 123, Water
    Resources Research Center, University of Hasvan at
    Manoa, Honolulu
    Ragone, S E. 1977 Geochemical effects of recharging the
    Magothy aquifer, Bay Park, New York, with tertiary-
    treated sewage U S Geological Survey Professional
    Paper 751-D.
    Rice, R. C. 1974 Soil clogging during infiltration of
    secondary effluent J Water Pollu. Control Fed.
    v 46, pp 708-716
    Smiths S., W J Kimmerer, E. A Laws, R. E Brock, and
    T Walsh 1981 Kaneohe Bay sewage diversion
    experiment Perspectives on ecosystem responses to
    nutritional perturbation. Pac Sci. v 35, no 4,
    pp 279-395
    Vecchioh, J and H.F H Ku. 1972 Preliminary results of
    injecting highly treated sewage effluent into a deep
    sand aquifer at Bay Park, New York U S Geological
    Survey Professional Paper 751-A.
    Vecchioli, J., H.F.H Ku, and D J Sulam 1980 Hydraulic
    effects of recharging the Magothy aquifer. Bay Park,
    New York, with ternary-treated sewage U S. Geologi-
    cal Survey Professional Paper 751-F
    June A Oberdorfer received a B .-1. from Brovjn
    University in 1970, studied Geology at tbe Unnersity oj
    Stockholm, Svieden in 1976-77, and received j Ph D in
    Hydrogeology from the University of Havian in 1983 She
    presently is Assistant Professor of Hydrogeology at San
    Jose State University. California
    Frank L. Peterson received a B 4 in Geology from
    Cornell Umverstty in 1963, and an VI 5 in 1965 and a
    Ph D in 1967 from Stanford University m Geology/
    Hydrology Since 196 7 be has been on tbe faculty of the
    University of Hau.au in Honolulu where he presently is
    Professor of Hydrogeology and Chairman of the Depart-
    ment of Geology and Geophysics, and Researcher uith tbe
    Hainan Water Resources Research Center	r
    761
    

    -------
    SECTION 5
    Mineral and Fossil Fuel Recovery Related Wells
    [5-11
    

    -------
    Section 5.1
    Mining, Sand, or Other Backfill Wells Supporting Data
    [5-2]
    

    -------
    SECTION 5.1.1
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (OR SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    Inspection of slurry injection
    procedures at the Old Darby Mine
    Works (or Black Mountain Mine)
    AUTHOR:
    (OR INVESTIGATOR)
    USEPA Region III
    DATE:
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION:
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    March 30, 1985
    Powell Mountain Coal Company - The
    Bonny Blue Site, Big Stone Gap,
    Virginia, USEPA Region III
    Coal preparation
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES: The facility utilizes strategically located
    and hydrogeologically suited abandoned underground mine workings
    as a settling basin where coa] fines can separate out of
    preparation plant wash water. Wash water is discharged into the
    upgradient end of the mine workings via injection wells. Water
    is pumped from the workings at the down-gradient end and recycled
    for coal preparation.
    A state permit was granted in February 19 84 , at which tiire
    underground injection of coal preparation refuse was initiated.
    A wet cleaning process during coal preparation produces refuse
    and a coal "fine", which is approximately 30% solids, at a rate
    of 30 ton/hour. Injection of this material occurs only during
    wet weather, when surface disposal into a refuse pile (covered
    under an NPDES permit) is not feasible.
    The disposal site is the abandoned workings of the Old Darby
    (Black Mountain) Mine. Surveys conducted by the operator
    indicate that the estimated 100 feet of sandstone overburden is
    stable, and that total storage volume is about 3.1 million cubic
    feet. The mine is totally sealed with only one discharge point.
    The injection slurry is monitored weekly for flow, pH, and
    suspended solids. Acidity, alkalinity, total iron, total
    manganese, sulfate, ammonia, nitrate, nitride, and total
    dissolved solids are monitored on a monthly basis. Two
    downgradient monitoring wells are located downgradient from the
    abandoned workings (about 10 feet below the coal seam). Monthly
    reports on operations and discharges are submitted to the
    of Mined Land Reclamation and
    Div is ion
    Board.
    the State Water Control
    [5-3]
    

    -------
    March. 30, 1985
    Ref: 8402-040-94015
    SUBJECT: Powell Mountain Coal Company
    (The Bonny Blue Site)
    PURPOSE: Inspection of slurry injection procedures at the
    Old Darby Mine Works (or Black Mountain Mine)
    in Big Stone Gap, (Virginia
    INTRODUCTION
    On Tuesday, March 5, 1985, SMC Martin met with the Virginia
    Division of Mined Land Reclamation (DMLR) in Big Stone Gap,
    Virginia. In attendance were Christopher Agoglia of SMC Martin;
    and Sam Easterling, Lynn D. Haynes, Mark Trent, Jerry Brown,
    Terry Brown, and Tina Stephens of DMLR. The meeting served a
    twofold purpose: 1) to familiarize SMC Martin with the Powell
    Mountain plant and injection operation; and 2) to explain to
    DMLR the purpose of this EPA Region III investigation. The DMLR
    had on file and readily provided extensive information on the
    operations of the Powell Mountain Preparation Plant. That
    information was reviewed, collected where pertinent, and is
    summarized in this report.
    On Wednesday, March 6, 1985, SMC Martin met with Mark Trent,
    DMLR Geologist, for a tour of the Powell Mountain Bonny Blue
    Site. Mr. Agoglia and Mr. Trent met with Mr. John Paul Jones,
    Environmental Engineer, Powell Mountain Coal Company, Inc., to
    briefly present the objectives of this study and to tour the
    site.
    The Powell Mountain coal preparation facility is unique in that
    it is able to utilize strategically located and hydro-
    geologically suitable abandoned underground mine workings as a
    giant subsurface settling basin where coal fines can settle out
    of preparation plant wash water. The plant discharges wash
    waters into the abandoned workings on their upgradient end via
    injection well, hence EPA Region Ill's interest in the facility
    (EPA administers Virginia's Underground Injection Control
    program). Before injection, a flocculant is added to these wash
    waters to facilitate settling of the suspended coal fines. Upon
    injection into the workings, the preparation plant wash waters
    migrate downgradient through the workings, the coal fines
    settling out during the process. On the downgradient side of
    the workings, the water is pumped from the workings for
    [5-4]
    

    -------
    March 30, 1985
    Ref: 8402-040-94015
    Powell Mountain Coal Company Report
    Page Two
    recirculation through the coal preparation cycle. By this time,
    the fines have settled out and the water can be reused with
    little or no special treatment. Built into this "closed loop"
    system, as will be described below, are numerous safeguards
    designed to monitor and protect surface water and ground-water
    integrity.
    SITE GEOLOGY
    The rocks outcropping in and adjacent to the permit area are
    contained within the Wise Formation and are of Pennsylvanian
    age. There are two principal coal seams outcropping within the
    permit boundaries—the Creek (No. 6) and the Darby (No. 5) coal
    beds. Other thin, inconsistent seams are also locally present.
    The strata at the site are representative of cyclic sedimen-
    tation dominated by thick, massive sandstone with lesser amounts
    of shale, sandy shale, coal, and underclay. The sandstones are
    gray, fine to medium-grained micaceous, cross-bedded, and poorly
    sorted. The grains are subrounded to angular with a matrix of
    fine rock fragments and occasionally with feldspar and other
    detrital minerals, making up greater than 15 percent of the
    total rock volume. They contain low interstitial porosity and
    varying degrees of secondary porosity as well as permeability.
    These same sandstones constitute the 100 feet of overburden
    above the Old Darby Mine Works.
    The shale, sandy shales, and underclay contain greater than
    75 percent matrix material. These are nonbedded to thinly
    laminated and sideritic. The underclays are highly rooted and
    generally plastic. Except for the underclays, these rocks are
    slightly porous to porous; but because these pore spaces are not
    interconnected, they are generally impermeable to ground-water
    flow. The underclays are nonporous or permeable.
    Regionally, the strike and dip of the strata are highly
    variable. In the immediate permit area, strike is Nw-Sw and dip
    is to the northwest at approximately 3 percent. There are no
    known structural faults in or adjacent to the permit area.
    The map in Appendix B shows a ground-water flow diagram of the
    abandoned mine workings generated from borehole data. The
    ground-water flow direction, according to this map, is northwest
    [5-5]
    

    -------
    March 30, 1985
    Ref: 8402-040-94015
    Powell Mountain Coal Company Report
    Page Three
    toward the downgradient end of the mine workings. As this
    portion of the workings is deep within the mountain, there are
    no exit points for mine waters on the upgradient side of the
    workings.
    OPERATION DESCRIPTION
    Preparation Plant
    The Powell Mountain Coal Company built the Bonny Blue Coal
    Preparation Plant in early 1981, and on November 2, 1981, the
    first coal load passed through the plant. The initial coal
    waste disposal system was a refuse or spill pile adjacent to the
    plant. Drainage problems arose during inclement weather and
    continued to plague the area around the refuse pile quite
    frequently. Therefore, on January 31, 1984, Powell Mountain
    Coal submitted a permit revision to initiate slurry injection
    into the nearby Old Darby Mine Works (or Black Mountain Mine).
    The permit was reviewed by the DMLR and the State Water Control
    Board and, after some revisions, was approved. In late
    February 1984, underground injection of coal preparation refuse
    began.
    The plant produces a high grade, low sulfur coal product. Final
    clean coal yield from the system is about 70 percent of raw coal
    input. The remaining 30 percent of raw material removed during
    the processing consists of high sulfur coal and rock
    impurities. This refuse product is placed on the refuse pile
    where it dries out and is reworked into the landscape.
    The wet cleaning process also produces a refuse and coal "fine"
    slurry which is approximately 3 0 percent solids by weight at a
    rate of about 30 tons per hour. The slurry can be and generally
    still is placed on the refuse pile during dry weather. However,
    during periods of wet weather or drainage problems, the slurry
    is injected into the disposal mine.
    Underground Disposal Site
    The injection disposal "site" for the Bonny Blue Coal
    Preparation Plant is the abandoned underground room and pillar
    workings of the Old Darby or Black Mountain Mine. The Old Darby
    Mine workings were surveyed by Powell Mountain Coal Company to
    [5-6] .
    

    -------
    March" 30, 1985
    Ref: 8402-040-94015
    Powell Mountain Coal Company Report
    Page Four
    estimate total holding capacity. Many of the pillar supports in
    the workings had reportedly been removed in the later stages of
    the mines's operation. This factor was significant in
    determining mine capacity. Although it increased the available
    volume of storage capacity, removal of these roof support
    pillars greatly increases the likelihood of cave-ins which could
    reduce the mine capacity. In the case of these specific
    abandoned workings, it is believed by Powell Mountain Coal
    Company that the 100 feet of sandstone overburden above the mine
    workings is sufficiently stable to stay intact despite the noted
    pillar removal. On the basis of these considerations, the
    abandoned mine's storage capacity was estimated at slightly over
    3.1 million cubic feet.
    Because of its location and physical layout, it was possible to
    totally seal off the Old Darby Mine leaving a single mine
    discharge point #4 (see Appendix A). This point, which used to
    be a large opening, was sealed with the exception of two 4-inch
    steel pipes, and dictates the "high water" point within the mine
    workings, preventing excessive pressures from being placed on
    the sealed entries farther downgradient that now constitute a
    part of this mine pool's confining wall or barrier. Under
    normal conditions, the water level in the workings never reaches
    this elevation, thus there is no surface discharge.
    MONITORING
    The map in Appendix A shows the locations of the wells, the
    preparation facility, and the adjacent abandoned mine workings.
    Well P-18B, located in the extreme downgradient end of the mine,
    is the makeup water supply well for the coal preparation plant.
    This well essentially closes the "loop" in the preparation
    plant's water supply/treatment system. The 15 HP pump on
    Well P-18B is set to turn on automatically, even when water is
    not required by the preparation plant, if the water level in the
    mine reaches a predetermined high water level. Note that the
    pipe discharge point mentioned earlier is also at this high
    water level as a secondary precaution to insure that water
    levels in the workings do not rise excessively. If water is
    not required by the preparation plant and the water level in the
    abandoned workings reaches this high water level, the automatic
    switch still turns the pump on, but the water is diverted to
    [5-7] .
    

    -------
    March 30, 1985
    Ref: 8402-040-94015
    Powell Mountain Coal Company Report
    Page Five
    either a large surface storage tank (capacity unknown) or a
    small settling pond (approximately 100 feet in diameter and
    6 feet deep) until the plant requires water once again. There
    is a manual override cutoff switch to turn the pump off, if
    needed. There is also a field treatment system that can
    adequately handle any water overflow from the tank or pond,
    should either of these become full. Water would be allowed to
    discharge from point 4 only in an emergency, if needed, to
    maintain the integrity of the mine pool barriers. Note that a
    monitoring schedule for this plant supply well is specified in
    the facility's NPDES permit.
    The slurry being injected is sampled and analyzed for flow, pH,
    and suspended solids weekly. On a monthly basis, the slurry is
    also tested for acidity, alkalinity, total iron, total
    manganese, sulfate, ammonia, Nitrate, Nitride, and total
    dissolved solids.
    Two wells, numbered P-18J and P-180, are located downgradient
    from the abandoned workings and approximately ten feet below the
    coal seam. These wells are monitored according to the NPDES
    permit to determine the hydrogeological impact of the mine
    pool/slurry disposal operation on the ground water adjacent to
    the abandoned mine. Baseline samples were taken from each of
    the wells before injection started, and the results were u?pd in
    compiling the NPDES permit.
    All samples are grab samples and all analytical results are
    included in a monthly report which is sent to the DMLR and the
    State Water Control Board. All sample analyses are conducted by
    Powell Mountain Coal Company.
    In addition to the underground slurry disposal system noted
    above, this coal preparation facility also utilizes a refuse
    pile to dewater and store the coarser coal refuse or reject
    material. Roughly 30 percent of the raw material run through
    the preparation plant is very high in sulfur content and is
    ultimately sent to the refuse pile. The pile has a dike
    completely around it with proper drainage facilities. The
    refuse pile runoff is monitored and checked periodically, and if
    it exceeds surface water disposal limitations set up by the
    Water Control Board, it is treated before release to the
    receiving stream.
    [5-8]
    

    -------
    March 30, 1985
    Ref: 8402-040-94015
    Powell Mountain Coal Company Report
    Page Six
    If any problems occur in the monitoring or treatment systems at
    Powell Mountain, the maintenance staff must immediately report
    the incident to management who in turn report it to the DMLR and
    the Water Control Board. After the problem has been resolved, a
    full report is submitted to the DMLR and Water Control Board.
    CONCLUSIONS
    It would appear, based upon the general information presented in
    and with this brief report, that the Powell Mountain Coal
    Company's coal refuse slurry underground injection system is an
    efficient, well-designed operation with adequate safeguards
    built in to prevent contamination of both surface and ground
    waters. The system is a novel design making efficient use of
    abandoned mine workings that might otherwise represent an
    environmental problem, rather than a solution to an
    environmental problem. Monitoring within the system itself and
    adjacent to the abandoned workings appears adequate for
    detection of any problems that might develop.
    [5-9]
    

    -------
    4 i
    1	1 PUMP|	1
    I BAILEYS TRACE
    PUMPS
    300 GPM
    STATIC THICKENER
    UNDERFLOW
    PUMPS
    OLD DARBY
    MINE WORKS
    DISCHARGE 013
    10 GPM
    PREPARATION PLANT
    GROUNDWATER
    INFLOW
    ^ IOGPM
    DISCHARGE 014
    300 GPM
    70TPH REFUSE
    EMERGENCY PURGE POND 003
    NO DISCHARGE EXPECTED
    GROUNDWATER FLOW DIAGRAM
    FOR THE OLD DARBY MINE WORKS
    CI
    I
    

    -------
    SECTION 5.1.2
    TITLE OF STUDY:	Inventory and Assessment of the
    (OR SOURCE OF INFORMATION) Disposal of Coal Slurry and Mine
    Drainage Precipitate Wastes into
    Underground Mines in West Virginia
    AUTHOR:	Diane Smith and Henry Rauch -
    (OR INVESTIGATOR)	Department of Geology and
    Geography, West Virginia
    University
    DATE:	December 19 86
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION: West Virginia, USEPA Region III
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:	Not applicable
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES: The emplacement of slurry waste from coal
    preparation plants and sludge resulting from treatment of acid
    mine drainage into underground mines is the most widely practiced
    Class V activity in West Virginia. Slurry waste is produced when
    bituminous coal is processed to reduce levels of sulfur and other
    impurities. Acid mine drainage, once produced, is often
    neutralized by alkaline materials, causing dissolved metals to
    precipitate. The resultant sludge is composed of hydrated iron
    oxyhydroxides and other metallic oxyhydroxides.
    Previous studies conducted by EPA Region IV included a site in
    Kentucky where waste disposal of this type potentially threatened
    a drinking water supply withdrawn from the same mine into which
    slurry was emplaced. A study conducted in Virginia demonstrated
    no effect on groundwater from this type of disposal, whereas an
    Ohio study demonstrated a case where sludge and water injected
    into a mine actually improved groundwater quality.
    For the West Virginia study, two sludge injection sites and one
    slurry injection site were chosen for site investigations.
    Samples of waste sludge or slurry were taken along with water
    samples of mine discharges. Water samples were analyzed for
    parameters addressed in National Primary and Secondary Drinking
    Water Regulations. Sludge and slurry samples were studied using
    various elemental and mineralogical analyses.
    Results of inventory efforts in this study revealed that
    approximately 46 companies have practiced underground disposal of
    sludge and slurry at 65 different projects in West Virginia.
    Some projects were begun as early as 1958. Methods of waste
    emplacement include gravity or pressurized injection into
    boreholes, air shafts, or drift openings. Slurry injection was
    shown to generally increase water quality within mine pools,
    whereas sludge injection generally caused an increase in iron,
    manganese, and total dissolved solids.
    [5-111
    

    -------
    A PRELIMINARY SUMMARY REPORT
    INVENTORY AND ASSESSMENT OF THE DISPOSAL OF
    COAL SLURRY AND MINE DRAINAGE PRECIPITATE
    WASTES INTO UNDERGROUND MI\ES IN WEST VIRGINIA
    by: Diane Smith and Henry Rauch
    Department of Geology
    and Geography
    West Virginia University
    Morgantown, WV 26506
    December, 1986
    Submitted to: Mr. David Long
    Underground Lnjection
    Control Program
    Division of Water Resources
    1260 Greenbrier Street
    Charleston, WV 25311
    

    -------
    1
    INTRODUCTION
    Definition and Scope of Problem
    The emplacement of coal mining wastes into
    underground mines is a practice which is performed by
    some coal companies in the state of West Virginia, and
    somewhat less commonly in neighboring states. Sucn
    underground disposal is of concern to the United States
    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as it falls
    under jurisdiction of the EPA's Underground Injection
    Control (UIC) program.
    As mandated by EPA, all UIC activities are to be
    assessed to determine their extent and their probable
    hydrologic impact. It is regard for the maintenance of
    good ground water quality that prompted EPA officials
    to institute the UIC program. Any ground water which
    contains < 10,000 ppm TDS (total dissolved solids), is
    considered as a potential future underground source of
    drinking water by EPA. In West Virginia, the state
    Department of Natural Resources (DNR), administers the
    UIC program for the federal government. Federal IJIC
    regulations have been adapted for West Virginia as
    Chapter 20, Article 5A of the 1983 (Series IX) West
    Virginia Administrative Regulations of the State Water
    Resources Board. Section 4.00 of these regulations
    [5-13]
    

    -------
    rigidly defines four classes of fluids which may be
    injected or emplaced underground. The fifth class of
    possible injected fluids covered by the UIC program
    includes the injection of any fluids not covered in the
    other four classes.
    After the effective date of the regulations
    pertaining to the UIC pro-jran. in V.est Virginia
    (1-9-36), it wns deternined by DH!: that the most widely
    practiced Class V activity in the state is the
    emplacement of slurry waste fror. coal preparation
    plants and sludge resulting fror.i treatment of acid nine
    drainage into underground mines.
    This study attempted to fulfill two objectives,
    as requested by DNR:
    1)	To conduct an inventory of the past and
    present practice of the disposal of slurry
    from coal preparation plants and sludge
    from mine drainage treatment into underground
    mines in the entire state of West Virginia
    for at least the most recent calendar year.
    2)	To assess the proLaole hydrologic impact
    of this activity by using information gained
    by collecting data for the inventory.
    

    -------
    3
    Background
    To reduce sulfur content, and levels of other
    undesirable impurities, bituminous run-of-mine coal is
    often prepared or processed to render the coal suitable
    for its intended use. Two waste product materials are
    created by this process; fine coal slurry (<1/16 inch
    diameter particles) and coarse yob (>1/16 inch diameter
    particles). The slurry is composed mainly of fine coal
    particles and some fine mineral matter. Bu 11 eri.iore,
    Simcoe and Naloy (19—). It is of concern in this
    project, as it is sometimes pumped into underground
    mines as a means of disposal. Likewise, acid mine
    drainage, once produced, is often neutralized by
    alkaline materials, as per state regulations, so that
    concentrations of metals originally dissolved in the
    water are precipitated out of solution as the pH is
    increased. This process results in the production of
    sludge, which is an accumulation of the solids which
    were precipitated out of the original mine drainage.
    Thus, the solids in the sludge (whicn usually comprise
    less than 10% of tne total volume) are largely composed
    of hydrated iron oxyhydroxides and other hydrated
    metallic oxyhydroxides. Simonyi, Akers and Grady
    (1977). The sludge is also sometimes emplaced into
    underground mines as a means of disposal.
    [5-15]
    

    -------
    4
    As far as it is known, no research such as this,
    which emphasizes concern for the possible hydrologic
    impact of the underground emplacement of slurry or
    sludge has ever been performed. Still, many references
    in the literature were of value in this project, as
    they dealt with related topics, such as the nature of
    slurry and sludge wastes. Other references did discuss
    the underground disposal of mining wastes, but did not
    address the hydrologic effects of the practice in
    detail. Some of the most useful references came not
    from published reports, but from vcrual communication
    with officials in states adjacent to West. Virginia or
    unpublished reports of investigations by private
    consultants or government agencies. It was learned
    through these sources that the injection of slurry
    and/or sludge has occurred to some extent in
    Heine and Associates (1983), Moody and Associates
    (1986), U.S. EPA Region IV (1985), Haynes (1986
    personal communication) and Oertel (1986 personal
    coiai.iun i ca t i on) . Although no other neighboring states
    are conducting inventories such as this, it seems that
    the officials in those states believe that underground
    disposal is much more widely practiced in West Virginia
    than in any other state. Oertel (1986 personal
    communication), Haynes (1986 personal communication)
    [5-16]
    

    -------
    5
    and Schuster (1936 personal communication).
    EPA Region IV reports of investigations documented
    the history of a very controversial slurry injection
    operation located in Kentucky. EPA investigators had
    concluded in this case that the slurry injection did
    pose a possible threat to a drinking water supply
    withdrawn from the same mine into which the slurry was
    emplaced. U.S. EPA (1985). A slurry injection site
    in Virginia, on the other hand, did not seem to display
    any obvious changes in water quality, according to
    Haynes (1986 personal communicatlon). Nc monitoring
    sites located downgradient of this slurry injection
    ever fell out of compliance with state water quality
    st andards.
    A mixture of sludge and water from the Ohio River
    was injected into a mine in Ohio, resulting in an
    apparent improvement in the quality of the mine pool
    into which it was injected, although of course the
    influence of the river water probably had much to do
    with this. Moody and Associates (1986). A sludge
    injection operation in Pennsylvania began to show
    long-term improvement in mine pool water quality after
    sludge injection began according to Heine and
    Associates (198.).
    It is apparent from these few examples that the
    possible impact of slurry and sludge disposal into
    [5-17]
    

    -------
    6
    underground mines is not clear and is worthy of
    examination. The variations in geologic and hydrologic
    settings of underground mines used for disposal and the
    original water quality within the nine as well as the
    compostion of the injected waste, is of course, of
    utmost importance in this evaluation and will vary with
    locat ion.
    Scope of Summary Report
    The intent of this summary report is to bring the
    West Virginia Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and
    the U.S. Environmental protection Agency (EPA) Reyion
    III Headquarters up to date on the progress of a major
    portion of the West Virginia Class V well assessment.
    This report does not include tables and figures showing
    raw or summary data and detailed results. The final
    report will include all such figures and will also
    provide more refined interpretation of data analysis
    results than is presented here.
    [5-18]
    

    -------
    1
    METHODS OF INVESTIGATION
    Inventory Study
    In order to develop an adequate data base for this
    project, it was decided to review information already
    available to the state of West Virginia as a first step
    in compiling inventory data. It was determined early
    after the beginning of this process, that to prepare
    the most accurate inventory possible, all coal
    companies which operate underground mines should be
    contacted and questioned as to their underground
    disposal practices. To accomplish this, a series of
    questionnaires were prepared and mailed to pertinent
    coal companies to determine first which companies
    utilized underground disposal, and then to seek
    specific detailed information pertinent to the
    assessment portion of the study for any facilities
    where the disposal of slurry and/or sludge in
    underground workings had ever occurred. Hereafter, a
    company which utilized or now utilizes the method of
    underground mine disposal of slurry and/or sludge will
    be said to have been operating or be operating disposal
    projects. The term disposal project will also be used
    to reference these Class V activities at specific
    si tes.
    [5-19]
    

    -------
    State National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
    System (NPDES) permit files on coal preparation plants,
    acid mine drainaye treatment plants, and underground
    mines were first examined for any information which
    would be applicable to assessing potential hydrologic
    impacts of waste disposal for this study. Any files
    examined prior to receiving replies to initial
    questionnaires sent to the companies were of cases
    originally known to Mr. Steve Meador, an engineer in
    charge of reviewing NPDES permits for mine companies
    for the West Virginia Department of Energy (DOE).
    Prior to the initial examination of the NPDES
    permit files, a preliminary mailing of a brief
    questionnaire called for all companies operating
    underground mines to supply volumetric information for
    all wastes disposed of into the underground mines in
    the years 1980-1986. Company names, addresses and
    mailing labels were supplied by the Mines and Minerals
    Division of the West Virginia Department of Mines for
    953 facilities (including 149 preparation or loading
    facilities and 814 underground mines) for this
    preliminary mailing.
    As these preliminary inventory responses were
    received, it was realized that clarification of many
    replies was necessary. It was then decided that no
    particular year should serve as a cutoff point, before
    [5-20]
    

    -------
    q
    which no information should be sought, instead the
    entire history of disposal of slurry and sludge was
    sought under the constraints of time, money, and
    availability of records and/or knowledgeable persons.
    Thus, for all ambiguous replies concerning past waste
    disposal projects, phone calls were made to the
    pertinent companies t.o determine with certainty whether
    underground disposal had been used prior to 1980 or
    not.
    After a reasonable time period beyond the deadline
    stipulated in a cover letter accompanying the
    preliminary questionnaire, responses in reference to
    approximately 415 facilities had been received; this
    represented less than one-half of the 963 facilities to
    which inquiries were addressed. Approximately eiyht
    weeks elapsed during this time. Response was limited,
    due in part to the ambiguity of whether or not
    companies which did not utilize underground disposal
    were obliged to respond.
    After it became evident that all companies which
    planned to respond to the preliminary questionnaire had
    done so, an official State memorandum from the DOE was
    mailed to the companies which had not responded to the
    first mailing. The memor-ndum was mailed approximately
    eleven weeks after the initial mailing of the
    preliminary inventory. This made it clear that
    [5-21]
    

    -------
    responses from all companies were expected, regardless
    of whether t.hey utilized underground disposal or not,
    and that replies should clearly state what involvement
    the company had had at any time with disposal of slurry
    or sludge underground. After t.he deadline dictated in
    this memorandum, approximately 205 companies,
    responsible for 259 facilities (24 preparation plants
    or loading facilities and 235 underground nines), still
    had not responded, and many replies still needed
    clari ficat ion.
    An attempt was then made to contact by telephone
    each of the 205 companies which had not responded to
    either mailing. After contacting various state
    agencies (West Virginia Department of Energy, and the
    West Virginia Geological and Economic Survey), it was
    discovered that these agencies do not. maintain reliable
    current telephone numbers for coal companies, as the
    state of flux in the industry would make it a very time
    consuming endeavor to do so. The most reliable source
    of current telephone numbers for these outstanding
    companies was discovered in local telephone books and
    from telephone operators. After researching telephone
    numbers, approximately C>3 additional companies were
    contacted.
    In another attempt to contact companies with
    responses still outstanding, addresses of 53 mining
    [5-22]
    

    -------
    u
    consulting firms in West Virginia were obtained from
    local telephone books, and each was mailed a letter
    listing several coal companies in their immediate area,
    requesting that they either reveal any companies on the
    list that had utilized underground disposal, upon the
    permission of that company, or reveal information on
    how to contact the companies. These letters resulted
    in the revelation of two underground disposal projects
    previously unknown, and in the contact of approximately
    five additional companies in reference to 17
    underground mines.
    Letters were also sent to addresses of
    approximately 75 public water suppliers in West
    Virginia which derive their supply from underground
    mines. This letter asked system operators to indicate
    whether their water supply, or any other flooded mine
    that they knew of, had ever had mining wastes injected
    into it. These letters resulted in an extremely poor
    response.
    After these efforts, 136 companies responsible for
    155 facilities (12 preparation plants or loading
    facilities and 143 underground mines) had not been
    contacted. To determine if any had ever disposed of
    waste into underground mines, Mr. Steve Meador, an
    engineer of DOE, agreed to provide copies of a list of
    these companies to tne state mine inspectors for their
    [5-23]
    

    -------
    1?
    comments on the status of the Class V injection well
    activities at the facilities under their jurisdiction.
    After this task was completed, the inventory portion of
    the study was to be considered complete.
    Unfortunately, this task never was completed, leaving
    some doubt as t.o whether these remaining companies had
    utilized underground disposal o£ mining wastes.
    A detailed questionnaire was then prepared and
    mailed to gain information on each disposal project
    that had been revealed by the preliminary
    questionnaire. The content of this questionnaire was
    greatly influenced by the recommendations found in
    Meador (1903) and by brief NPDt'S questionnaires.
    Information was sought on the technique of mine waste
    disposal, the mine used for disposal, the hydrologic
    setting of the mine used for disposal, water quality
    information for mine discharges (if the data were
    deemed representat.ive of the mine pool water quality),
    the source of the waste, and the problems with and
    effects of disposal. Pertinent information on the
    analyses, volumes and means of assessing the impact of
    the injected waste, was thereby obtained, when it. was
    available and when companies completed the detailed
    questionnaire. At this p«rint, although 58 disposal
    projects were known, detailed questionnaires could only
    be sent to inquire upon approximately 55 of these as
    [5-24]
    

    -------
    u
    three companies were untraceable. Thus, 61
    questionnaires were sent to 48 companies. Detailed
    information requests on certain disposal projects were
    mailed to more than one company in some cases when it
    was known that more that one company had occupied a
    site, or that one company had been responsible for the
    operation of a preparation plant or acid mine drainage
    treatment facility, while another company had operated'
    the mine used for disposal. Out of these detailed
    questionnaires that were mailed, 30 were received
    completed to some extent. It was after receiving
    questionnaires that five additional disposal projects
    were created, when it was learned that different mines
    or sections of a mine were being used for disposal.
    Also, one disposal project was taken off the list after
    one company verified that t.hey had not disposed of
    slurry underground when previously, it was believed
    that they had. Despite repeated phone calls to company
    officials urging them to finish and return the detailed
    questionnaires, the remaining questionnaires never were
    rece i ved.
    The accuracy and completeness of the inventory
    prepared for the Underground Injection Control (UIC)
    program were the highest, practically obtainable. mhe
    coal industry is in a state of constant flux in West
    Virginia, and t.he operation of coal preparation plants,
    [5-25]
    

    -------
    14
    acid mine drainage treatment plants, and underground
    coal mines frequently changes ownership. Thus,
    information on underground disposal which may have been
    practiced before the present facility owners commenced
    operations is often very difficult to obtain. Even if
    former owners, operators, or company officials can be
    contacted in some of these cases, they are reluctant to
    provide anything but minimal information on any
    activities for which they are no longer legally
    responsible. Also, in the case of companies which have
    gone out of business, and/or left abandoned facilities
    behind in years prior to abandonment regulations,
    virtually no information exists on any aspect of the
    original facility; even such vitals as the whereabouts
    of former owners of the facility, much less information
    on underground disposal. Finally, the possibility of
    dishonest answers to questionnaire forms does exist,
    albeit hopefully slight. Negative replies to queries
    involving revelation of underground disposal of slurry
    or sludje were not field checked in any way. One
    operator indicated by telephone that it would be very
    easy for a company to dispose of waste underground
    surrept.i t.iously.
    Numerous unexpected delays have affected the
    timely completion of this project. Difficulties were
    encountered in obtaining detailed inventory responses
    [5-23]
    

    -------
    from the coal industry. Over three-quarters of the
    information obtained was received one to two months
    after the stipulated deadline (which had allowed four
    weeks for response). In many cases, the companies had
    to be contacted repeatedly to urge them to send in
    their inventories and later to clarify some of the
    information they finally did supply.
    Assessment of Inventory Data
    To assess the hydrologic impact of slurry and
    sludge disposal into underground mines, it was
    necessary to have water quality data to examine.
    Whenever 'sufficient water quality information was
    obtained from the mine inventory data, a comparison was
    made between mine waters not affected and potentially
    affected by the waste injection. Water quality data
    were compared between pre-waste-injection time periods
    and post-waste-injection time periods for the same
    sampling points located downgradient of waste injection
    sites, or post-injection water quality data were
    compared between points upgradient of the waste
    injection location and points downgradient of the waste
    injection location. Monitoring points were determined
    to be upgradient or downgradient of waste injection
    sites by examination of topographic maps and structure
    [5-27]
    

    -------
    contour maps for the mined coal seam, or by an
    understanding of the underground piping systems in some
    cases. In all cases, it was indicated by a company
    official that no complicating variables which could
    bias results were known to exist. All of the
    comparisons were made from existing data, knowing that
    many variables which could possibly affect results
    could not be accounted for with certainty. The water
    quality monitoring points used in the above comparisons
    were either dewatering wells or gravity mine discharges
    and all those used were deemed to be indicative of the
    mine pool water quality by key personnel of the company
    which operated the mine. Avoided were pumps located in
    air shafts which in some cases divert water from
    shallow aquifers into the mine pool at that location;
    although such pumps would produce water from the mine
    level, they would not be indicative of the quality of
    the actual mine pool because of mixing effects.
    The Mann-Whitney U test, a powerful nonparametric
    statistical test which determines the liklihood of two
    samples having come from the same population, was
    employed to statistically make the water quality data
    comparisons. The Mann-Whitney U value was obtained by
    use of a Basic computer program, w1 ich was translated
    into Fortran by Mr. Randy Crowe, an electronic and
    computer technician for the Geology and Geography
    [5-28]
    

    -------
    Department of West Virginia University, for use on the
    Geovax computer system available to that, department.
    Another algorithm written in Fortran by Mr. Crowe,
    computed T values for all comparisons, so that
    correction for rank ties was employed in all cases.
    One example done by hand was used to check the results
    obtained by both programs to ensure that the programs
    were working correctly. As referenced in Siegel
    (1956), depending on the number of observations (water
    samples) in the larger data group involved in the
    comparison, either an exact probability, a critical U
    value, or a z probability was determined so that the
    significance of the U value could be determined.
    In the case of mines for which no water quality
    data were available, all information obtained was
    simply organized, sorted, and tabularized in various
    ways, so that the inventory data will be available for
    use to interested parties in the future. The
    appendices of the final report will contain this
    information, and private files are available from this
    study for use of State agencies on every mine in West
    Virginia which this study disclosed as having ever had
    slurry or sludge deposited into it, (although, in some
    cases, the information is scant).
    One potential problem associated mainly with the
    disposal of slurry waste resulting from coal
    [5-29]
    

    -------
    preparation is contamination of mine waters by
    chemicals used in the preparation process. An
    understanding of what types of chemicals are used is
    vital as they would become emplaced into an underground
    mine used for disposal, along with the slurry. Most
    coal companies stated that they know only the
    "M-derivaiive" name, a trade name used by Dow Chemical
    Company, Inc., when asked what type of frothers and
    flocculants are utilized at the coal preparation plant
    they operate. An attempt was therefore made to gather
    information from Dow Chemical Co., Inc., which would
    have revealed the generic names of chemicals used for
    processing coal in preparation plants. Although no
    additional information was obtained, data already
    coupiled by Mr. Steve Meador of the West Virginia DOE
    were organized and presented in tables for the final
    report for the purpose of providing some information on
    these chemicals and their possible behavior in the mine
    environment. Other trade name chemicals known to be
    used in coal preparation are supplied by American
    Cyanamid, Inc., Nalco Chemical Co., and Union Carbide.
    Any information obtained on these chemicals was also
    included in the appendices for the final report.
    Assessment of Mines Used for Detailed Study
    [5-30]
    

    -------
    19
    It had been agreed upon, before commencement of
    work on this project, that, field investigations of two
    to four sites would take place to better evaluate the
    hydrologic impacts of the underground waste disposal.
    Shortly after the research began, it was decided that
    an attempt would be made to study a northern coalfield
    slurry injection site, a northern coalfield sludje
    injection site, a southern coalfield slurry injection
    site, and a southern coalfield sludge injection site.
    It seemed tnat the natural geographic division between
    the northern, high sulfur coalfield and the southern,
    low sulfur coalfield, as well as the two basic waste
    types being investigated, lent, themselves well as
    useful criteria by which to guide the intitial sit.e
    selection process.
    Site selection criteria also included the
    followi ng:
    1)	The company must be willing to cooperate
    with the project.
    2)	water quality data must be available for
    either pre- ana post-injection t.ime periods,
    or for upgradient and downgradient. points
    with respect to t.he point of injection.
    3)	A sample of waste which is injected into
    [5-31]
    

    -------
    .10
    the mine must be available.
    4) Water samples of points located upgradient
    and downgradient of the injection site, must
    be available.
    It was with difficulty that mines suitable for the
    detailed	site investigations were located.
    Approximately two months of screening sites, asking for
    permission to study sites (whicn often required formal
    written requests), and waiting for the decision of the
    main company offices was spent on this task. After
    contacting 15 companies in reference to 32 facilities,
    it became apparent that certain compromises of these
    criteria would have to be made, so that the field work
    could be undertaken. Three sites, one northern
    coalfield sludge injection site, one southern coalfield
    sludge injection site, and one southern coalfield
    slurry injection site, were eventually selected for
    detailed study. A northern coalfield slurry injection
    was never selected as the few that exist were either
    complicated by other factors or the company which
    operated them was uncooperative. When permission to
    use these three mine sites was finally granted ")y the
    companies and the other selection criteria were
    satisfied to some degree, at least one sampling trip
    [5-32]
    

    -------
    was made to each selected site. For each mine, samples
    of the waste material (sludge or slurry) which was
    being injected were taken along with water samples of
    mine discharges or deep wells tapping the mine pool.
    At a later time in the laboratory, after the solids had
    settled from the sample of waste material injected into
    the mine, the supernatent was drawn off and also
    analyzed. This was done with the help of coal company
    personnel, especially with gaining access to the
    sampling locations and selection of the locations.
    The first field trip to one of the mine sites
    proved futile, as prevailing drought conditions and
    mechanical failures of mine dewatering pumps did not
    allow any water sampling, although a sample of slurry
    was obtained. Fortunately at this mine site, (DPN 30)
    the company representative agreed to collect the
    necessary water samples; although this was not done
    according to optimum field techniques, it was necessary
    for obtaining the samples. The site is located
    approximately 300 miles from Morgantown, West Virginia,
    and therefore time and expense constraints prevented
    the undertaking of repeated site visits by the senior
    author to determine when the dewatering pumps were
    operating. After approximately two months, a second
    trip was taken to the mine site, whereupon it was
    learned that this site did not satisfy an important
    

    -------
    
    criterion after all; the control mine (unaffected by
    waste injection) was found to be located in a different
    coal seam than the nearby mine sampled for waste impact
    assessment. This fact was not initially known during
    the first mine visit. Fortunately, near the same site
    two mines both located within 5 miles of the Kentucky
    border with West Virginia could provide experimental
    and control discharges as one mine was used for slurry
    injection and the other not used for slurry injection.
    With the exception of slurry injection, the mines are
    similar in every other way. Therefore, two mines
    located in Kentucky together comprise the third
    detailed study site. Although located in Kentucky the
    geologic and hydrologic settings of this mine are
    similar to those found in western West Virginia,
    therefore results should be representative for West
    Vi ry i ni a.
    Water samples were analyzed for the inorganic
    chemical parameters listed by EPA for primary and
    secondary quality standards wherever possible, as well
    as other selected chemical parameters. Since the
    protection of possible potable drinking water sources
    is of interest, extensive chemical analyses were deemed
    to be necessary. Parameters measured in the field
    included pH, specific conductance, temperature and
    flow. Every water sample was split into three factions
    [5-34]
    

    -------
    12
    as they were taken in the field. One portion was left
    raw, one portion was filtered and acidified and one
    portion was acidified but not filtered. The samples
    were refrigerated in a cooler until they were analyzed.
    Time-critical analyses such as acidity, alkalinity and
    nitrate were performed by the senior author at the West
    Virginia University geochemistry laboratory on a room
    temperature split of the raw water sample within 24
    hours of its collection. Total hot acidity was
    titrated using approximately 0.02 N NaOH, and
    alkalinity was titrated using approximately 0.02 N
    H2SO4. Nitrate was determined by use of the HACH
    Company spectrophotometer. Other water analyses were
    performed by the COMER chemistry laboratory of Mr.
    Larry Nice and Mr. Tom Simonyi at West Virginia
    University or by the chemistry laboratory of Mr. Harry
    Johnson of the West Virginia Department of Natural
    Resources (DNR). Sludge and slurry waste samples were
    subjected to elemental and mineralogical analyses. A
    list of parameters for which the wastes were analyzed
    is shown in table 1. The analyses of sludge and slurry
    were performed by technicians of the West Virginia
    University and West Virginia Geological and Economic
    Survey analytical laboratory of D:. John Renton and by
    the DNR chemistry laboratory of Mr. Johnson.
    The COMER laboratory performed metal analyses of
    [5-35]
    

    -------
    Table 1. Slurry and Sludge Parameters
    %
    Sodium
    V
    Magnesi urn
    %
    Potassium
    «
    Aluminum
    %
    Silicon
    %
    Ti tanium
    %
    Iron
    %
    Manganese
    %
    Zi nc
    %
    Strontium
    %
    Phosphorous
    %
    Sulfur
    14 Angstrom Clays
    Ilite - K0~2A14 (si8-6Al0"2) 020 ^0HU
    Coquimbite - Fe2(S04)g
    Gypsun - CaS04*2H20
    Kaolinite - AI2 Si2 O5 (0H)4
    Jarosite - KFe3 (S04) 2 (OH)g
    Anhydrite - CaS04
    Szomonolnokite - FeS04
    Quartz - Si02
    Orthoclase - KAlSi30g
    Plagioclase - AbiooAnO~AbOAnlOO
    Ab = Albite - NaAlSi3O0
    An = Anorthite - CaAl2Si2C>3
    Calcite - CaC03
    Bassanite - CaS04»l/2H20
    Dolomite - CaMg (003)2
    Siderite - FeC03
    Pyrite - FeS2
    

    -------
    ">5
    water samples using ASTM method D2576, Metals in Water
    and Wastewater by Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometry,
    with a Perkin-Elmer model 2380 atomic absorption
    spectrophotometer. Titration for chloride was
    performed by use of ASTM method D512, Method C,
    Colorimet.ric Method for Chloride. Sulfate was analyzed
    by use of ASTM method LN-D516, Sulfate Ion in Water and
    Wastewater, and TSS (total suspended solids) was
    performed by ASTM method LN-D1888, Particulate and
    Dissolved Material in Water.
    The Department of Natural Resources performed
    water analyses by Standard Methods, using a
    Perkin-Elmer model 503 spectrophotometer for metal
    analyses. Elemental sludge and slurry analyses, also
    completed by this agency, were done through the use of
    Standard Methods, on dried, homogeneous sub-samples.
    To prepare sludge samples for mineral group
    analysis, homogeneous sub-samples were obtained and
    then subsequently oven-dried. The slurry waste
    sub-samples were likewise taken and dried and a low
    temperature ash then prepared; this was done to remove
    organics and thus prevent interference of organics with
    the determination of mineral matter composition. The
    laboratory technicians of Dr. Renton then utilized
    x-ray diffraction and x-ray fluorescence techniques to
    provide the information on mineral groups and elements
    [5-37]
    

    -------
    found in the wastes.
    Knowledge of the steady state (equilibrium)
    effects of sludge and slurry waste on water was desired
    in order to help make an assessment of the hydrologic
    impact of waste disposal. Therefore, laboratory tests
    were designed in order to help determine what kind of
    interactions may occur between the solid-containing
    wastes and water. This information was desired to aid
    in the interpretation of results and to predict future
    effects of underground mine sludge and slurry disposal
    on mine waters.
    In these laboratory tests, sub-samples of waste
    material from the visited mine sites -were mixed in one
    set of containers with distilled and deionized water
    and in another set of containers with samples of mine
    pool water from parts of the mine which were unaffected
    by the waste injection. The ratio of water to waste
    emplaced varied from approximately 5:1 to about 17:1.
    The samples were contained within Duckets or flasks and
    were covered to prevent evaporation.
    These tests were originally intended t.o be
    long-term equilibrium tests. However, equilibrium was
    apparently not reached after a month of occasional
    stirring and monitoring of specific conductance values
    for the container samples. By comparison, Schuller,
    Krapac and Griffin (1901) had achieved solid-liquid
    [5-38]
    

    -------
    equilibrium in their similar long-term equilibrium
    tests only after a period of about. 21 weeks. This
    amount of time was not available in our project.
    Supernatant was therefore drawn off of the samples
    after at least one month of containment and was
    analyzed for the same chemical parameters tested on the
    mine waters as described above. All chemical analysis
    results will be displayed in an appendix to the final
    report.
    Also, water samples were withdrawn from the
    supernatant above samples of settled waste material
    that had been obtained at the mine site. The material
    from which these samples were derived represented the
    actual material pumped into the mine. These chemical
    analysis results will likewise be available in an
    appendix of the final report. These analysis results
    were obtained t.o help document the quality of the water
    pumped into the mine as part, of the slurry or sludge
    suspensions, since such water may itself potentially
    cause changes in water quality in the mine.
    In addition to the field sampling and laboratory
    testing done at the mines used for detailed study,
    statistical testing of pre-existing water quality data
    was performed. This data had been collected by the
    coal companies for their NPDES reports. The
    Mann-Whitney U Test was employed as the means of
    

    -------
    testing water quality trends, as described previously
    in the Assessment of Inventory Data section of this
    summary report. Data collected by the senior author
    was not included in this testing. Although monitoring
    information does not exist on any but a very few
    parameters, samples obtained from discharges and/or
    wells located upgradient or downyradient from waste
    injection points should provide a basis for a one time
    comparison, on the basis that no other known variables
    should influence water quality, except for the waste
    injection.
    Some investigation was also done into the
    hydrogeologic, structural and stratigraphic settings at
    the three visited mine sites. This examination was
    undertaken in an attempt to help determine what the
    potential may be for leakage of mine waters into
    adjacent aquifers in case the enhanced contamination of
    the mine pool water from injected wastes had occurred,
    and to better document the conditions present at the
    mines investigated.
    [5-40]
    

    -------
    RESULTS
    29
    Inventory Data Assessment
    The collected inventory data revealed that
    approximately 46 companies (or different branches of
    certain companies) had been known at one time or
    another to have practiced underground disposal of
    sludge or slurry in West Virginia. A total of 60 mines
    are known to have been utilized as repositories for
    these coal mining wastes. The difference in numbers
    here reflects not only the fact that one company may
    use more than one mine for disposal but that, in some
    cases, transfers in ownership and/or operation of a
    mine or preparation facility took place. It should be
    noted, however, that in many cases only the current
    operator is known.
    As described previously, the term disposal project
    will be used to refer to the emplacement of slurry
    and/or sludge waste from the mining industry into
    underground mines. Because the data were entered onto
    the West Virginia Network computer for the purpose of
    sorting it and computing some volumetric totals, some
    mines have been split into separate disposal projects.
    For instance, if it was clear from data received that
    [5-41]
    

    -------
    distinctly separate sections of a mine were used for
    disposal, each mine section was treated as a separate
    disposal project. Likewise, where both slurry and
    sludge were emplaced into one mine, two separate
    disposal projects were created. Thus, 65 disposal
    projects were defined to most effectively describe
    these known disposal activities.
    From this study, the first year in which sludge
    was known to have been injected into an underground
    mine was 1975. The first year of known slurry
    injection was 1958. It. is apparent that an increase in
    underground disposal of slurry occurred after 1972, the
    year in which the Buffalo Creek Dam disaster occurred
    when a large slurry impoundment failed, causing the
    death of over one hundred people. Davies (1973). The
    injection of. sludge has risen fairly steadily since
    1975 which is probably simply a result of increased
    sludge production as acid mine drainage treatment
    increased, reflecting increased mined acreage and
    tougher mining regulations.
    In general it is clear that sludge injection
    occurs primarily in the northern coalfield and slurry
    injection occurs primarily in the southern coalfield in
    West Virginia. The absence of sludge inj-ction in the
    southern coalfield is to be expected, as the low sulfur
    characteristics of the coal seams commonly mined there
    

    -------
    11
    usually produces alkaline rather than acidic drainage.
    An explanation of the deficiency of slurry injection in
    the northern coalfield is less obvious. Perhaps
    companies which operate preparation plants in t.he north
    realize that the slurry produced could potentially be
    acid toxic, whereas in the south slurry is usually
    naturally alkaline.
    Of the 65 disposal projects defined, 41 are
    located in the southern coalfield and 24 in the
    northern coalfield of West Virginia. Of the 41
    southern coalfield disposal projects, 38 of them are
    slurry injection sites. Of the 24 northern coalfield
    disposal projects, 18 of them are sludge injection
    sites.
    Methods of emplacement of waste include gravity or
    pressurized injection into boreholes, airshafts or
    drift openings. Slurry injection is generally
    practiced yearround while sludge injection usually
    occurs on a semi-annual basis as impoundments are
    cleaned.
    Table 2 shows the approximated total volumes of
    slurry and sludge known to have been injected into
    underground mines in West Virginia for each year for
    which the information exists. A greater than sign
    indicates that the provided figure is known to be low
    with certainty when certain companies indicated they
    [5-43]
    

    -------
    ble 2. ANNUAL VOLUMES OF WASTE
    PUT UNDERGROUND
    YEAR WASTE	VOLUME
    (MG/YR)
    1958	SLUDGE	0
    1959	SLUDGE	0
    1960	SLUDGE	0
    1961	SLUDGE	0
    1962	SLUDGE	0
    1963	SLUDGE			0
    1964	SLUDGE		0
    1965	SLUDGE		0
    1966	SLUDGE	0
    1967	SLUDGE		0
    1968	SLUDGE		0
    1969	SLUDGE		0
    1970	SLUDGE		0
    1971	SLUDGE	0
    1972	SLUDGE	0
    1973	SLUDGE	.,...	0
    197 4	SLUDGE	0
    1975	SLUDGE		>0
    1976	SLUDGE		>0
    1977	SLUDGE	>10
    1978	SLUDGE			>48.66
    1979	SLUDGE			>48.66
    1980	SLUDGE			>86.46
    1981	SLUDGE			>71.36
    1982	SLUDGE		>91.6
    1983	SLUDGE			>93.29
    1984	SLUDGE			>120.02
    1985	SLUDGE			122.51
    1986	SLUDGE		198.7
    

    -------
    3"?
    Table 2 continued. ANNUAL VOLUMES OF
    WASTE PUT UNDERGROUND
    YEAR WASTE
    VOLUME
    (MG/YR)
    1958
    SLURRY 	
    0.1
    1959
    SLURRY 	
    0.1
    1960
    SLURRY 	
    0.1
    1961
    SLURRY 	
    0.1
    1962
    SLURRY 	
    0.1
    1963
    SLURRY 	
    >0.1
    1964
    SLURRY 	
    >0.1
    1965
    SLURRY 	
    >0.1
    1966
    SLURRY 	
    >0.1
    1967
    SLURRY 	
    >0
    1968
    SLURRY 	
    >0
    1969
    SLURRY 	
    >0
    1970
    SLURRY 	
    >0
    1971
    SLURRY 	
    >0
    1972
    SLURRY 	
    >0
    1973
    SLURRY 	
    >0
    1974
    SLURRY 	
    >24.3
    1975
    SLURRY 	
    >24.3
    1976
    SLURRY 	
    >24.3
    1977
    SLURRY 	
    >24.3
    1978
    SLURRY 	
    >97.4
    1979
    SLURRY 	
    >106.86
    1980
    SLURRY 	
    >222.03
    1981
    SLURRY 	
    >158.79
    1982
    SLURRY 	
    >105.61
    1983
    SLURRY 	
    >207.26
    1984
    SLURRY 	
    >355.48
    1985
    SLURRY 	
    >463.97
    1986
    SLURRY 	
    >455.38
    [5-45]
    

    -------
    had injected waste underground during those years but
    could not provide a volume estimate. The figures
    provided here would then represent a conservative
    estimate of the total volume of waste injected eacn
    year, including the liquid portion of the waste. On
    average, the injected waste (in the case of both sludge
    and slurry) probably contained anywhere from 5-25%
    solids, according to several references on the typical
    nature of these wastes. Tables showing the volume
    estimates for injected waste for each disposal project
    will be included in the final report, as will a ma,j of
    the location of the disposal projects. The number of
    disposal projects for which no injected waste volume
    estimates are available will therefore be apparent.
    The data obtained during this study are largely
    based on estimates made by coal industry officials.
    The companies contacted in many cases acknowledged that
    their quantitative estimates were rough and that they
    could not verify t.heir accuracy. This is often true
    for volumetric information and for calculations of
    waste repository void space. It is unknown in most
    cases what degree of roof collapse and/or floor heaving
    has occurred within abandoned mines or abandoned
    sections of mines, which could limit void space.
    Some of the information requested from the
    companies is simply unknown by them as such records
    [5-46]
    

    -------
    35
    were not kept or were not available. Also political
    situations involving a recent reorganization of the
    State mine regulatory agencies and a strained
    relationship between the coal industry and these state
    regulatory agencies, combined with economic
    difficulties being experienced by the coal industry,
    served to make t.he task of data collection very
    di fficult.
    Still, it appears that other than information
    becoming scarcer going back in time, as was expected,
    no geographic trends in missing data are apparent by
    visual examination. That is, it does not appear that
    there are biasing concentrations of missing data in any
    ma]or subgroup of the northern or southern coalfield,
    waste type or position of the mines with respect to
    dra inage.
    This inventory was meant to be exhaustive. Still,
    as mentioned earlier, the possibility exists that some
    disposal projects exist that were not revealed by the
    data collection process. However it is believed that
    the data collection process was not biased, and
    therefore the information presented, if not exhaustive,
    is representative, especially for the more recent years
    (1980-1986).
    Effects of Waste Injection on Mine water Quality
    [5-47]
    

    -------
    36
    Of the 65 disposal projects known, seven,
    including those used for detailed study, satisfied
    criteria necessary to make statistical comparisons
    between mine waters unaffected by injected waste and
    nearby mine waters that have potentially been affected
    by injected waste (are downgradient of injected waste).
    It must be cautioned, however, that the deternination
    of whether or not a discharge point for mine water
    would be considered to be upgradient or downgradient of
    emplaced mine waste was based solely on the direction
    of the dip of the coal seam between the point of waste
    injection and the discharge point. It is possible that
    noflow barriers such as intact coal barriers, seals or
    ventilation stoppings within the mine could create
    diversions in the expected water flow paths. Even the
    accumulation of solids from slurry or sludge injection
    could potentially cause changes in ground water flow
    paths. Also, where floor heaving, cuts or shots in the
    floor, or roof falls in longwall or retreat mined areas
    occur, additional water diversions are possible. This
    is especially true when gobs are tight. It is also
    possiole that localized reversals in the hydrologic
    gradient may be developed within mines. This could
    happen wheu the dip of the coal seam is slight and
    noflow barriers combined with the presence of low
    resistance flow paths upgradient of these barriers
    [5-48]
    

    -------
    37
    occur.
    Also, although the absence of obvious confounding
    variables was confirmed before these statistical
    comparisons were made, other variables not considered
    in this study could also affect results. For instance,
    variations in coal seam lithology and chemical quality
    across a mine were not examined. Also the locations of
    and quality and quantity of sources of ground water
    recharge to underground mines, the residence time of
    water within the mine, and the dynamics of the mine
    flow system are unknown for this study. These
    variables could affect background water quality in
    mines. Thus, injected slurry or sludge waste would not
    be the only potential factor affecting mine water
    quality, and in fact may be minor in effect compared
    with some other factors.
    Still, results obtained thusfar for the seven
    disposal projects at mines which have been used for
    statistical testing do show some interesting trends,
    which to the best of existing knowledge may be
    attributable to waste injection. All data used in
    these analyses were supplied by the coal industry as
    part of their NPDES monitoring requirements. Data
    collected by the senior author was not used in the
    Mann-Whitney U Test analyses, but instead was used to
    provide a one-time comparison of complete analyses for
    [5-49]
    

    -------
    samples unaffected and potentially affected by waste
    injection. Wherever possible, the Mann-Whitney U Test
    Was run on the following parameters: pH, total iron,
    total manganese, total suspended solids, acidity and
    alkalinity, as these parameters are most frequently
    included by the coal industry in the water quality data
    submitted to the state of West Virginia as part of
    their NPDES reports. Some of the results obtained are
    briefly summarized below, first for the slurry
    injection sites, and then for the sludge injection
    sits. Statistically significant results are emphasized
    here.
    Slurry Injection Sites
    DPN 26 is a southern coalfield slurry injection
    site located in the Pocahontas no. 3 seam. A
    comparison between pre-injection data and
    post-injection data at one sampling point located
    downgradi ent of the slurry injection point showed that
    pH was higher during the post-injection period at the
    0.025 alpha significance level. Both total iron and
    total manganese were lower at. 0.01 and 0.05 alpha
    significance levels, respectively, during the post
    injection period.
    Comparison of a downgradient post-injection water
    [5-50]
    

    -------
    quality sampling point (point 1) against an upgradient
    post-injection water quality sampling point (point 2)
    showed that total iron was lower at the 0.025 alpha
    level at point 1 and alkalinity was higher at sample
    point 1 also at the 0.025 alpha level.
    Finally, a comparison was made between pre- and
    post-injection data at sample point 2, a point which is
    upgradient of the slurry injection point. During the
    post-inject.ion period, pH was significantly up at 0.01
    alpha and total iron, total manganese, and total
    suspended solids were significantly down at the 0.1,
    0.01, and 0.1 alpha levels, respectively. These
    results tend to indicate that the injection of slurry
    may have improved water quality in the mine, but that
    water quality was improving with time anyway.
    DPN 27, a southern coalfield slurry injection
    site, located in the No. 2 Gas seam lent itself to
    only one comparison. Pre- and post-injection water
    quality from a point located downgradient of the slurry
    injection site showed that the total manganese was
    lower and alkalinity was higher during the post
    injection period at alpha levels of 0.01 and 0.1,
    respectively. Based on this one comparison, it appears
    that the injection of slurry has improved water
    quali ty.
    DPN 34 represents a northern coalfield slurry
    [5-51]
    

    -------
    40
    injection project, located below drainage in the upper
    Freeport Seam in Upshur County. Two water quality
    sampling points were used for the statistical
    comparison. Sample point 1 is downgradient of a slurry
    injection area, while sample point 2 is upgradient of
    all slurry injection. All available analyses were
    during the post injection time period. It is
    interesting to note that total iron and total manganese
    were lower at point 1 by <0.001 alpha level. Also,
    alkalinity was higher at point. 1 by <0.001 alpha and pH
    was higher at sample point 1 although not statistically
    significant. These results seem to indicate that the
    injection of the slurry improved the water quality in
    the mine pool.
    DPN 99 is located in Martin County, Kentucky, but
    is within five miles of southwestern West Virginia.
    Only two water quality monitoring points were available
    for statistical comparison. All data used were from
    samples taken by the coal company after slurry
    injection began. Sample point 1 drains a mine that was
    as completely filled to capacity with slurry as
    possible, and sample point 2 drains a mine that was
    never used for slurry injection. Both mines are
    located in the Coaiourg coal seam and are above
    regional drainage level.
    The statistical comparison between sample point 1
    [5-52]
    

    -------
    41
    and 2 showed that at sample point 1, pH was lower,
    total iron was lower, total manganese was lower, total
    suspended solids was lower, and alkalinity was higher
    at <0.001 alpha significance level. These results tend
    to indicate that the injection of slurry into the mine
    from which sample point 1 drains improved the water
    quality at that mine.
    Results of analyses of water samples obtained in
    the field, supernatent of pumped slurry, and
    supernatent withdrawn fron the laboratory geochemical
    testing have not yet been received.
    As seen in these few examples for which water
    quality data was analyzed, clrcumstances indicate that
    slurry injection may be improving water quality within
    the mine for those parameters investigated. It is
    possible that the injection of the alkaline slurry is
    increasing the pH and alkalinity of the mine pool and
    thus the waters within the mine are less apt to
    dissolve metals, thus explaining the decreases found in
    iron and manganese levels.
    Sludge Injection Sites
    Disposal project number (DPN) 23 is a southern
    coalfield sludge injection site in the Campbell Creek
    coal seam (both the Peerless and No. 2 Gas seams were
    [5-53]
    

    -------
    42
    mined here). The mine is situated above the regional
    drainage level. Four sampling points (discharge sites)
    located along the downdip side of this mine differ only
    in that one, sample point 1, is most likely to show
    some effect of the injected sludge due to its location
    with respect to the mine entrance used for sludge
    1nject ion.
    Mann-Whitney U tests were used to compare the
    water quality at sample point 1 with that for the other
    three sample points. The results of the testing showed
    that total iron and total manganese were higher at
    sample point 1 than at sample points 2, 3 and 4, all at
    the O.COl alpha significance level. A slightly higher
    pH was evident at sample point 1 compared to point 4
    winch is significant at the 0.1 alpha level. Total
    suspended solins was higher at sample point 1 than at
    the other three sample points at tne n.05 or less alpha
    level. Alkalinity was significantly lower at sample
    point 1 in comparison to sample point 3 at 0.1 alpha.
    This information suggests that the injected sludge may
    be responsible for the higher iron and manganese levels
    evident at sample point 1.
    Results of analyses performed on water samples
    collected in the field by the senior author at this
    mine at the same four monitoring points showed that
    sample 1 was higher in nitrate, dissolved and total
    [5-54]
    

    -------
    41
    iron, dissolved and total manganese, sulfate, total
    dissolved solids, aluminum, lead, potassium, and
    chloride compared to the other three samples. The
    supernatent of the pumped sludge contained high levels
    of sulfate (818.1), Ca (182.60), Mg (6.88), As (4.74),
    Na (52.85) and K (3.78) ... all values being given in
    mg/1.
    Results of laboratory analyses performed by the
    West Virginia University COMER laboratory on the
    supernatent decanted off the sludge/water mixtures
    which comprised the laboratory equilibrium tests were
    interesting. The COMER laboratory results indicated
    tnat each sludge sample had added significant amounts
    of sodium, sulfate and arsenic to levels originally
    seen at sample point 4. Four separate sludge samples
    which had been taken from different sections of the two
    settling ponds at the minesite were used in these
    equilibrium tests.
    The decanted waters from the mixture of distilled
    and deionized water and the same four sludge samples
    was analyzed by the West Virginia DNR chemistry
    laboratory.	Every sludge sample contributed
    significant amounts of alkalinity, nitrate, total iron,
    total manganese, sulfate, total dissolved solids,
    aluminum, calcium, magnesium, zinc, copper, barium,
    sodium and chloride to the sampled water. Both sets of
    [5-55]
    

    -------
    44
    samples were withdrawn from the holding containers
    after 63 days had elapsed since the commencement of the
    tests. The mixtures were stirred approximately once a
    week.
    DPN 25 is a northern coalfield sludge injection
    site located below regional drainage in the Pittsburgh
    coal seam. The sludge, which is injected into the mine
    at two locations, results from the treatment of acid
    mine drainage from the Pittsburgh coal seam. Three
    discharge points used for the water quality comparisons
    are pumped discharges, two of which (points 1 and 2)
    might be affected by t lie sludge injection, by
    examination of their location relative to the sludge
    injection locations and the dip of the coal seam.
    Sample point 1 is downgradient of one sludge injection
    hole, but upgradient of the other. Point 2 is
    downgradient of both sludge injection holes by virtue
    of the structure contours, but lies in an area of the
    mine not directly connected to the area in which the
    nearest sludge injection hole is located. Sample point
    3 is located quite close to, but upgradient of one
    sludge injection borehole. Comparison between sample
    points 2 and 3 showed that water from sample point 2
    had a higher total iron level and a higher acidity both
    at the 0.001 alpha level.
    However, it must be noted that a comparison
    [5-55]
    

    -------
    <15
    between sample points 1 and 2 showed significant
    differences at the 0.001 alpha level for all available
    parameters. It was observed that pH, alkalinity and
    total suspended solids were much higher at sample point
    1, while total iron and acidity were higher at sample
    point 2. These differences could mask the other
    differences observed. The difference may be due to
    unknown sources of recharge entering the mine from
    overlying aquifers.
    DPN 37 is a northern coalfield sludge injection
    site located in the Lower Kittanning coal seam.
    Statistical comparisons became slightly complicated at
    this site; two well discharge points (1 and 2) which
    are both located downgradient of the one sludge
    injection borehole by virtue of the coal dip trend
    alone, were in reality downgradient for separate
    periods of time once injection started. This is
    because the water overflow from the area used for
    sludge injection was alternately piped to the two mine
    sumps from which either well pump discharges (1 and 2)
    are derived. Thus, whether a sample is located
    upgradient or downgradient of the sludge injection area
    depends on the date the sample was taken at each
    location. The exact date that the change in
    underground piping occurred was noted by the company so
    that it was known when the overflow was routed to each
    15-57]
    

    -------
    46
    sump. Thus, it is possible that a sample was
    upgradient at one point in time and downgradient at
    another point in time. Sample point 4 is located
    upgradient of the sludge injection point. Both pre-
    and post-sludge injection data are available at each of
    these sample points. (Sample 3 was a special sample
    taken underground for this project by the coal company
    so that a sample which was indisputably upgradient of
    the sludge injection area would be available on which
    to run a complete suite of analyses).
    A comparison between sample point 1 downgradient
    post-injection data and sample point 1 pre-injection
    data showed that after injection, pH went down
    significantly at the 0.001 alpha level, while total
    iron increased significantly at the 0.05 alpha level,
    total manganese decreased significantly at the 0.025
    alpha level, and alkalinity decreased significantly at
    the 0.001 alpha level. The only significant difference
    between sample point 1 downgradient post-injection data
    and sample point 1 upgradient post-lnjection data was
    that, total manganese was s igni f i cant ly higher at the
    0.01 alpha level downgradient.
    Total manganese is lower for sample point 1
    downgradient post-injection data than for sample point.
    4 upgradient post-injection data at the 0.001 alpha
    significance level. Comparing sample point 2
    [5-58]
    

    -------
    47
    downgradient post-injection water quality to sample
    point 2 upgradient post-in]ection water quality
    revealed that total manganese and total suspended
    solids were higher when sample point 2 was downgradient
    (with overflow routed to the sample point. 2 pump sump),
    both at the 0.01 alpha significance level. Also,
    alkalinity was lower when the sample was downgradient
    at the 0.1 alpha significance level.
    Post-injection comparisons between sample point 2
    (downgradient) and sample point 4 (upgradient) showed
    that for sample point 2, pll was higher at 0.1 alpha,
    total iron was lower at 0.1 alpha, total manganese was
    higher at 0.1 alpha, total suspended solids was higher
    at 0.1 alpha, and alkalinity was higher at 0.1 alpha.
    However, data also showed that sample point 2
    downgradient post-injection water quality differed
    siyni f icantly from sample point. 1 downgradient
    post-injection water quality in several ways; sample
    point 2 had lower total iron at 0.01 alpha, higher
    total manganese at 0.05 alpha, higher total suspended
    solids at 0.001 alpha and higher alkalinity at 0.001
    alpha.
    Also, post-injection data compared between
    upgradient sample points 1 and 2 showed that, for
    sample point 2, total manganese was higher at 0.05
    alpha, total suspended solids was higher at 0.01 alpha,
    [5-59]
    

    -------
    48
    and alkalinity was higher at 0.01 alpha.
    Finally, a comparision of pre- and post-injection
    data at sample point 4, which is upgradient of the
    sludge injection point, showed that during the
    post-injection time period, pH was lower at 0.001
    alpha, and total iron and total manganese were higher
    both at the 0.025 alpha significance level.
    Interpretation of these results for DPN 37 is
    complicated and will be better understood by
    referencing data and figures that will be available in
    the final report. A factor at this mine which may tend
    to lower the integrity of comparisons involving sample
    points 1 and 2 is that, in reality, it is unknown what
    length of time would elapse before a change in the
    undergound piping system would actually dictate that
    the overflow of the sludge injection area would be
    routed to one or the other pump sump in its entirity.
    Also, the possibility exists that either pump sump
    could sometimes receive a portion of the overflow by
    gravity. Also, sample 4, although upgradient. of the
    sludge injection showed significant changes in water
    quality between the pre- and post-injection time
    periods. This also serves to lend some doubt as to the
    validity of making conclusive statements on tlie effect
    of the sludge injection at this site.
    Results of analyses of water samples collected in
    [5-60]
    

    -------
    49
    the field, supernatent of pumped sludge, or supernatent
    withdrawn from geochemical tests in the laboratory have
    not yet been received.
    The results obtained thusfar from the sludge
    injection sites tend to indicate that the injection of
    sludge may be responsible for an increase in iron and
    manganese levels within underground mines in some
    cases. This might occur where the pH of the mine pool
    is low enough to redissolve the sludge to some extent.
    Theoretically, depending on the dynamics of the mine
    pool, this condition could reverse itself as continued
    injection of sludge, which virtually always contains
    excess alkalinity, begins to neutralize acidity within
    the mine pool and raise the pH to a level which could
    preclude the dissolution of the metals. This might
    occur when a steady source of acidic water is not
    recharging the mine pool which would maintain the
    acidity of the pool.
    gorvcSfeBrt rut Eiftegra-Etessr
    It is difficult to make conclusions with certainty
    from information revealed during this project. Still,
    for the limited parameters on which statistical
    analyses were performed, data suggests that alkaline
    slurry injected into an alkaline mine pool may improve
    [5-61]
    

    -------
    50
    water quality of the mine pool. The injection of
    alkaline sludge into an acidic mine pool may result in
    redissolution of a portion of the sludge, resulting in
    somewhat higher levels of iron, manganese and total
    dissolved solids in the mine pool, at least initially.
    The interaction of slurry and sludge wastes witn
    mine waters was concentrated upon in this project, as
    in most cases, this can be considered as the ultimate
    source of possible enhanced contamination fron the
    emplacement of these wastes into underground mines.
    Thus, the migration of waters potentially contaminated
    by this disposal method into adjacent aquifers was not
    addressed specifically by this study, but furthur
    speculation on this possibility will be available in
    the final report.
    Continued interpretation of results is still
    underway, and those found within this report are from
    initial speculation and must be considered tentative.
    Receipt of additional laboratory analyses from the West
    Virginia DNrt laboratories will provide more information
    to aid in this interpretation, if they become
    ava ilable.
    [5-62]
    

    -------
    REFERENCES
    Buttermore, W.ll., E.J. Uimcoe, and n.a. Maloy, 19 —,
    Characterization of Coal Refuse: Report No.
    159, West Virginia University Coai Research
    Bureau, 137 p.
    Davies, W.E., 1973, Ruffalo Creek Dam Disaster: Why it
    Happened: Vol. 43 No. 7 American Society of
    Civil Engineers pp. 69-72.
    Haynes, L. , Virginia Division of Minet; Land and
    Reclanation, 1936, personal coinmu n i ca t i on.
    Heine, Walter, and Associates, 1983, Delmont Experi-
    mental Pioject-Underground Disposal of AMD
    Sludge to an Abandoned Deep Mne: Walter
    Heine and Associates, Boiling Springs, Pa.
    Meaaor, S., Engineer, Permits Section, West Virginia
    Department of Energy, 19E6, personal
    ccmmunica 11on.
    yeador, S., 1983, Underground Disposal of Mining
    Wastes: unpublished paper, West Virginia
    Department of Natural Resources,
    Water Resources Division,
    Moody and Associates, Inc., 1986, Preliminary
    Hydrogeologic Evaluation of Acid Seep Water
    Injection at the Powhatan No. 3 Mine, 24 p.
    Oertel, A., Illinois Department of Mines and Minerals,
    1986, personal coinmum ca t ion .
    Schuller, R.M., I.G. Krapac, and R.A. Griffin, 1981,
    Evaluation of Laboratory-produced Leachates Used
    for Environmental Assessment of Coal Refuse:
    Symposium on Surface Mining Hydrology,
    Sedimentology and Reclamation, University
    of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky. pp. 123-128.
    [5-63]
    

    -------
    Schuster, E., Pennsylvania Bureau of irun.j,
    1986 , personal coi;u.iuni ra t 1 on.
    Sie.jel, S., 1 *J 5 6 , Nonparamet r ic rtatistics for the
    Basic Sciences McGraw-Hill, Now York, N.Y.
    pp. 11 r>-12o .
    Simonyi, T., D.J. Akers, Jr., and V<.C. Grddy, 1977 ,
    The Character and Utilization oi tne sludge
    fron Acid Mine Drainage Treatment Facilities:
    Report No. 165, West Virginia university
    Cod1 Research Hureau, 0 p.
    U.S. Cnv i r .indent al Protection Agency, Uegion IV, 1935
    Determination and Consent Order, Docket no.
    IU-C5-UIC-101.
    U.o. Environmental Piotection Agency, i'egion IV, 1905
    Emergency Administrative Older, Docket no.
    I'J- 85-100.
    Vsest Virginia Administrative Regulations, State Water
    Resources Hoard, Chapter 20-5A, llJH3 Series IX
    ReguIdtions for the Uest Virginia Underground
    Injection Ccntroi Program.
    

    -------
    KEY FOR INTERPRETATION OF DATA TABLES
    DPN = disposal project number
    WVFACILCODES = West Virginia facility code number
    DRAIN PROX = position of the mine with respect to
    drainage (Ab = above, HE = below,
    AT = at or both above and below)
    NUMBER OF INJECTION
    POINTS OF STATUS: UC = under construction
    AC = active
    TA = temporarily abandoned
    PA = permanently abandoned
    with state approval
    AN = permanently abandoned
    without state approval
    A ooc or blank indicates missing information
    

    -------
    Inrttl
    i lifki i
    f•»«I hp
    11 • I Vf II I »
    ¦ i *» v* im r i
    II Kill I I
    ¦ iram
    a* hot*i i
    i kt lis •
    11 boiiii
    i tilli•
    *i
    II	run « It! I
    tl	iikim iai i r
    a I	s«» mi i ii*i
    II	IHi III! Ill
    | ¦ ||I|S I I B I
    «|| I II i I III %
    ( III IBM III I ' 91
    P UN 0 I 11 k I III I
    a i ¦ »	i
    nil ini/i I 11 I
    iiii ii «• rit r ri in
    BO I KM I
    04
    CT>
    0>
    

    -------
    ririiroiri coil rciMii	viri «r	roirm
    tltil • lUkl »	laMI raul
    t	iiHia	m»iii At tiaiaif iati
    WTni*\«i« *	IMitiBi	S|»IIT	i| lirll ("Mil
    2	I'inpi sir»«\ih
    4	» idi || i
    MiM%v*ni k	ioidi \|»m	ti oki liaiaii
    « 1ll>fM%4«Nlf	4 **(••« I
    %4i«u%*ni i	atnisAi ^tairr ¦» i«a\«i iiara
    i	« vnnsioi a
    ii	iiaaif !¦ uaaiii ia»i
    i AmiMiMti	i virriini •
    %	uiikat iiaaat n riaai ia i«as
    I	i luiiiKii »
    \4T>ia>T«Maj t	iiramM stiaav u	raai
    l	i iiliiiu |
    mii«i«aii| ii	iitiiian Mm)	ini an
    f	/ Mtl» t
    «4>ui«*anj s	imn nam ro*i
    • Ui^i«im|	t man a
    V4in«nna| a	mtiiaitld tiaattf
    t i *n«i	• i on i
    v*toi • i•«| ¦	atiaoicn ii maani •( caikui lliTa
    i ||«||| Niini	«l IK VIKLL
    I 4«»-lY9o*»a	« till »
    ¦	»p«a»a Mam il aiiaii lam
    < 4«*iMmi|	« imn »
    %	ir»n«iu M.paav	raawii iiiai
    ¦	t libit I
    n	utio nam	umi ••«**
    i u«i»toni	c «4inia%0« c
    s4iMai««ni »	itaimi nam it till taiiui
    l **IMl|4,«M||	| ||D| | |4l% |
    s4?a^t\Mi4 j	aiai.u \iaaai *• lum auaiua
    i 4an**i4iM«	* »
    uiimsMtit) %	iuiiii Mint ii m*a aiaiia*
    ¦	i yHiaat a
    s	io
    -------
    MIK III )>»M r*4l	ruMM IMF fl| »•»!« | n|MBI
    trni • i•>m ¦	«isii rani
    «IW'44MMa| s	|»<*l I fill 41 rwttl I I IOI
    I l|	« «|| t
    m	iiiiki m rnt'ir n i iiism ih^ii
    kfS4t«st^»di m	mAHuB si m.i	•• Mki «*»»«•
    i gi'iau* i
    |	iipi.o N| pi a i	rilia »«i1t
    r i< *fc«i***mn	< i
    »	niio ji ftiiiv i «ir
    *1< i	< iintireii »
    m	iti.nui •» <<.i\niivtii
    I t> «inl|tnii|	i i
    |	iiivmii «<•••«	•* i «n sui i(4li
    r 11  l| SIMM	It	lllllll ail
    i i«	i blunt i
    kfsi'niMniii %	!•>!«¦ simtT II DIIU lllllll
    rit sin immii*	< iimili i
    • IMtUhMlIM %	| fit AH Mllll	MIIIlM ll«l
    i»vlll	II |l tkll*Ml»l|	• Mil |l»|| I
    ||M III \| i V | It I
    mimii r o« ustr in tin nana ni	mrifiti mats	»r >>1
    >sii Mia n\rns*i	»<	*i	i*	ri	aa
    rn«ii«iiia rair nait mi »¦¦ •« »'¦	**	«	»	w	i
    Miisiuii iii larnt in *ii i in s * ir	*	i	h	n	it
    V ( ¦"« III Ii* II Ml lllllll III I	II	i	I	M	M
    rini villi rur naif	ui •
    in riMI ia i mi	a	a	«	h	i
    an ri*al	l*ai touir ml t
    Minm i rtiP PI in	^oiaa>«*« an I o«ao	• • • a	t
    • i|r» rnr pi ill	iiin ilai
    ai a¦ «> rnr n ui	jiti in. aiiniii
    i incn nir run	hi \i mi	h	ii u it
    • •~an iiipi a in rinr	am
    ¦	uiiii an t: ri»r ri**i	hhiii ¦«» tt
    Atrial 4II PI «il	llllf 1111	II	|	O	II
    ¦•mi • «&««¦ 411 fl lt-1	»««"IS ¦	It	tl	inn
    i isn n i • tim ri hi	i isii in i ki	< i*	•	n	n	¦
    ¦	• tair n in	in ¦ iiai	4>	ii	«	it	i
    ¦	III in i ah fl 1*1	mi ainai mi ¦» «	«i	i	n	
    -------
    in HMHiHiin r«»l mi»hi
    VIII* < 1 Ok ¦
    nri m *1*11 (••¦rm
    • asm rim
    •»»l
    • H« I
    III Him »
    < Mlllll i
    it inn ¦¦ nit
    ii ru < in L*a
    •I to	rati
    tt «t • »«• it>ii
    ir «»m rtiisi
    riu nut	urn iu i n
    o*«Yit ••• sua in run	ia iui
    •mi t	an rial	iia iiii/s km
    

    -------
    : urit
    i l)MP A N V MAMF AND AllORtSS
    IFt.AI CONT ACT/rilOMt
    THHUII AI. COMT ATT/PIIONF
    1
    T AMD T ftNIRCt, 1 NtORPORATtD
    0OK 20ft
    • RltCtTON mils, VV 26S23
    . PAl'l THOMAS/(304 » 379- 2266
    Oil MA«.OON/I 3I»4» 379-2260
    7
    WINDSOR rOWLR MOUSE TOAI 1 0 MP A N V
    r o »ox ??o
    ' VJMDSOR HI ir,H7S, VV
    . VII L 1 A M 1. NATIItVS/ 13041 394-5337
    DANIEI P CARNF Y/« 304 ¦ 39-t-5 JO 1
    Will 1 AM fcOSVORTII
    3
    •ADCLI COAl COMPANY
    ; < T A1f N OVIS If PIITSTONI
    ;
    . R 1 BOIil tT/< 304 1477-06 I 2
    . 
    4
    ' SO 111 H UN ION ir»Al < OH P A H V •
    . HOI 1H MAIN Siarn
    : GRt CMsiti'Bf.. pa isaoi
    j
    DAVID S j«l||SUN/<4l?lA.14-l9RH
    i
    : ROYALTY SHOIM frSS COAL COMPANY
    r 0 DUX 7?fARY/004i259-S?34
    . KAMI. «~! AH\ . i 1M4 » ?59 - S?14
    0
    ENOXY LDAl ( ON r A N Y
    
    
    9
    ISIANO CIUK 1 OAI COMPANY
    UOIOLN DIVISION
    BOX 840
    ItOI UFN . uv 2S62S
    •
    OANKY * OX/« 1«41 ?39-2161
    . ie
    CAP 1 T 1)1 MIM "5 . INCORPORATED
    P O BUX 59N
    LAST BANL . VV 7S«»67
    : P J H A 1 STEADS(304~949/6647
    R N FVI FS/I 104»949-6N47
    HI 1 V| H B VII I ri / • -ll»4 • «I4«» - f.«-l 7
    * * o«i of bn it«n
    in
    s
    o
    

    -------
    . dpm
    COMPANY NAME AND ADDRESS
    IFHAL CONY ATT/PHONE
    TECHNICAL CON T ACT/fHOME
    : 11
    ISlAND CRFEI C4IAI COMPANY
    . IOITUIIM DIVISION
    * STAB ROUTE 1. BOX 481
    CRAIGSVIIIE. VV 2620}
    : 4 1 N HUNTI R/<3<*4I 742- 3S0I
    : KFNNtTti i0IINS0N/O04»74?-5^0l
    1 2
    : island ram thai company
    ; NORTHERN DIVISION
    : STAR ROUT F 1 RO| 481
    : 4 RAI4.SVII 1 1 WV ?t>?OS
    : JIM IIIINTER/ <3041 742-558 1
    : lENNhlH J OHMSON/ 1 .104 1742-5^01
    . 13
    : SHANNON rorilKlMlAS COAI COMP A N T
    : r o aui in*
    : VMCN. VV 240OI
    ;
    . SARD 1 IIATI mn/ *3041436-314-1
    1 4
    : OLCA COAL COMPANY
    : DA AVER R
    : COALVOOD. VV 24874
    : MARTIN VALER1/l304k297-2 1 15
    : DON A1 D V 1 MSTON/•304 297-J135
    1 5
    : O.S STEEL I INI NO COMPANY. INC
    1)965 lALTUIKlF AVFNUE
    : CUESAPtAIU. VV 35)13
    . 1 R RIIYI F/004 > 340-72 1 5
    JIM CANTFRRORV/<304»340-2?1 *
    16
    • OLD BEN COAL COMPANY
    . V O. KOI 47
    : THACKER. VV 25694
    : MARKUS J LAPD/«3e4l426-8804
    010 V HAYNARO/(3041426-6804
    : 17
    : POND CRIFI COAI COMPANY
    : P O RON 763
    : RATEVAN, VV 25678
    
    f.ORIMlN R SI ONL/i 304 i 23^-4 290
    16
    ROX 53tt
    ' PINCVILIE. VV 24874
    
    SAMI'll 11A T 4 III R/i 304 436-1144
    * l»
    SOUTHERN OHIO (GAL CORPANY
    r 0. ROK 552
    fAIRlONY, VV 76555
    ; RH'HAfrL P *IAN0/<304i36«-5515
    . J A NFS MCCAl HI* MY/i304 1 366-S* 1 *
    : ze
    BIO REAR RININIi COMPANY. IMC
    r 0. ROI 407
    L1NC0, VV 2 48 S 7
    
    I RKT4 II 1 ISTIR/t Y(I4*6R2"474H
    * • Oil of Bn i mi
    

    -------
    iipn
    LONTAHY KANE AND AIHlBLNb
    LFOAL CONTACT/PHOWC
    1 tCH NH'Al rONTACT/PMUIt
    2 I
    ; arhfrst coal (Oirmi
    : nfNEUL Dll IVtll
    : IUNDALF. VV 2S6DI
    
    : GRtG BAI1/«304iSB3-656I
    ' 22
    : INPFRIAI roi UMV
    : r o box e
    : RVRNUM 1 , uv 2SOT4
    ; C ITNPII CHRISTIAN. 1 1 1 / « «0 4 t04 S - S 9 1 R
    . BOB (IIIIIMI«H/n(}4iMS-1IO|
    M
    UMFRM A^MtllAllli (OAI COR TOM AT 1 ON
    CIUBI FS'TON . WV
    : ofnnis n iosttry
    : BOM PARI II /« l«»4» ?47-f,?f,6
    24
    ONAI KlININr. (lINfANT
    P O BOX 336
    NAOISON, VV 2SI1B
    R|l 11A1II /l«iHltN0/(3ll4tirl,J-hMI
    SI II lit |\U«/ • UMl K.'l- |U II
    25
    CONSOLIDATION COAL COMPANY
    NOIIIiaN V*ST VIIUIHU IKION
    VIST* DEI 1IO
    P 0. BOX |]M
    NOBOA NT OV N. VV 26S«7-|3I4
    : D D A IIL II/ I 3041 296 - 346 I
    • EDVARH A RO0BF/l104l?96-J461
    ' liAVID 1 \ IMRIl/ i 104 *206-34f 1
    26
    CANNFLTON 1 NDH 395-336 1
    * RAYMOND SI'»fTH/iin4n9S-Mfi|
    * • n»i of i«>iiiti
    to
    

    -------
    . or*
    COMPANY MANE ANO ADDRESS
    1 F(jAI. CONY ACY/PMONC
    TECHNICAL CONTACY/PBONE
    : 3 i
    : CONSOLIDATION rOAl COMPANY
    : nobimfiw i»rM v iK> i n i a irr.ioii
    : VISTA IUL *10
    : r o box I3i4
    : MOBOANTOWN, WV 26507-1314
    : D D AUCH/1304 I 296-3461
    : EDWABO A BOOBE/<304»296-3461
    : MIHBI M t Yl III B/• Yi»4 » 206 - 146 I
    : s?
    roHSoa ioat ioh coai company
    NUB T lit B N WISI V1 Hi 1N1 A BIGION
    . VISTA DEI BIO
    : P O. BOX 1314
    : M0BCAN10WN. WV 26507-1314
    : 0 D AUCII/« 304 I 29ft-346 I
    : tDWAND A MOOBF/I 304 I 296-146 I
    . MltlNI 1 1 t T( III B/I .104 1 296-346 I
    . 33
    ; U.S 51 ELL MINING COMPANY, INC
    CEBTBAL DIVISION
    P 0 BOI 430
    GABT, WV 2 4 8 36
    : JOHN F DICKINSON, I 1/i304»448 - 7201
    : VII L 1 AM D ALI EN/t .104*448-7202 :
    . 34
    UPStiUB COAI S COB FOB A YI ON
    P 0 BOI 7«9
    BUCIUANNON. VV 26201
    : JERRY VESTFAIL/I364I472-29O0
    : HABRY I DUNMIBE/I304 14 72-2900 :
    33
    V 1 BO 1 N 1 A LBtWS L'fl A1 COMPANY
    P U. BOX 727
    1 At <1| B . NV 2 4*44
    : JOSFF 1 IIR* NGRIIDFR/I 304 1 436-84M
    IIAMOII) nut ins/oo::
    . 16
    t>BUU BBOIIIIBS 4 OUST BUCY ION COMPANY
    P O. BOI 1379
    fill 1 AMSON. WV 2566 I
    . I M AMI 2»t>ARkS/«703t566-8944
    : IBANK SfABKS/t7U3)S66-H944
    . 37
    lilt ENFRCY ( OR TOR AT ION
    BD 3
    BOX 146
    PIIILIPPI, VV 26416
    : GORDAN COOK/<304) 45 7 - 5797
    : iOilN t LY/i 304 i 457- 1992
    . 38
    P 0. BOX 773
    MAVCUAN, WV 256 78
    
    : GOB DON B S10NF/4304I235-4290
    ' 39
    ONAB MINING COMPANY
    P 0. BOX 338
    MAPISON. WV 2 * 1 3n
    : BICIIABU ZIGM0ND/I304I369-IO-4I
    . MOYTt | SON/< 104»369- IH4 |
    40
    1 SI AMD CRFtl 4
    CO
    

    -------
    t)PN
    COMPANY HAKE AND Abl»RtSS
    LKU COHT ATT/riOKP
    TFCHN ICAI ClINT ACT/PHONE
    4 |
    : THE POVEIITON < ORP A tt Y
    : ioi a
    . NAIIORT. WV 2*639
    : PINO f AO 1 t T T 1/(3641343-6561
    . OINO PAOIFTT 1/13041583-6501
    
    ! i (INSfll 1 IIA T ION 1 OA 1 (ONfANT
    : NO II1 lit R N WIST VIRGINIA RlGlON
    : VIST* I'M Rlli
    r O ROK 1314
    . K0R<< AN T OWN . WV 26S07-I3I4
    . n n Rill ll/< 1M4I 296-3461
    HIWAII) A NIMIfll / « 304 » 296 - 146 |
    11 A V | |l | V A N I ¦VARI» M>TIR/»4I2»746 - 14 Oil
    47 t	CONSOLIDATION COAl COMPANY
    :	FASTFRN RFc;iON
    :	44 t
    I CHARLESTON. WV 2SJ04
    50 : RERACHA MINING
    01CI BI H(»^Si/^J04l7^2- I4J4
    

    -------
    : DFM
    COMPANY HANL A H 0 AUDBESS
    LEUAI rONlALT/PllONC
    TCfllNICAl C0H1 AC|/fB01E
    • ft 1
    Bkiro *1 XI Nil < (IRflllAf IOH •
    
    
    : 3 2
    RUrFUU MINI NTr
    :
    
    53
    ¦ AC VIM. INCORPORATED
    41 EAGLFS lOAll
    BECKLEV. HV 2SNOI
    : U PAUL k I/H/064J 2SJ-272 I
    : RlKE MilAN/I394I2S1-272I
    . 34
    ISLAND CttIK lOAl CONFANV
    . VOfn»LIJ» DIVISION
    : STAR BOU1I- 1 . BOX 4ft I
    : cbaigsviii e. yv 2620s
    : JIN HUNTER/< 3041742 5 JO 1
    : KENNfrTH J Oil If SON /•3O4»742-530|
    . 53
    : CNOIY
    :
    
    : 36
    : 1 SI AHD CRFFI (Oil COMPANY
    : NORTHERN b 1 V 1 S I ON
    : STAR ROUTE 1. box 4UI
    : CRAIGSVJLLP. WV 262US
    : JIB IIUHTIR/i3n4l74Z-35ni
    . KENNETH JOHNSON/* 3041742-530I
    : s y
    ISLAND Cat LI KlAl iUNf ANY
    : NORTHERN DIVISION
    ; star aouTf i. cn 401
    : CRAIGSVJLIE. WV ?62fc>5
    4 1 N IIUDtll/O04i?O-5SQI
    : kMNFfll JOIIH SUM / 1 lf»4 » 74?- 4 5*1 I
    : 38
    ; OKJB ¦CHINO con r ANY
    : r.O BOX 338
    : NAD 1 SON » WV 2 S130
    : KICilAID ZI(*HOND/OB4I369- l«4l
    : S10TTV ISON/I304I369-1041
    . 39
    ; SLAB FORK COAL CONPANY *
    :
    A D B IAN NC11 N N E Y'•304 I 78 7 - 3 7 2 9
    : €0
    : NCKANLE BES0UI4(S. INC
    : BUI 1518
    : UILLIANSOM. W 25661
    * • 0• 1 of III 1 t«||
    : ODIL ROJFRS/
    NARVIN VFRNATTfR
    Ol
    I
    N
    cn
    

    -------
    . Dm
    CORP ANY N A ML AND ADDRESS
    LECAI CONTACT/? flON E
    TCrilNICAl COKT APT/PHO^E
    51
    : Nfciro NININO MJIPllRATION •
    -
    
    : 52
    : BUFFALO MINING
    :
    
    : S3
    .¦AC If* ST. iNCIJif OIATLD
    : 4 1 tACLFS MOAU
    : RFCKIEY. VV 2SNOI
    : U PALI L l£^R/<3B4I 253-272 1
    : HIE Mil4N/<3B4i2S3-272l
    . 54
    : ISIANO CIIII HUI COMPANY
    : NOR? IILCN DIVISION
    : STAR ROUT 1- 1 . BOX 4NK
    : FRAICSVII 1 E. WV 262l»s
    : JIN IIUNTI-R/I304I742 - 5 SO 1
    : KFNNMH JOHNSON/< 304 » 742-550 |
    . SS
    : CNOIT
    :
    
    : 56
    1 SI AND CRFFI 1 Oil COMPANY
    : NOBIIILRN DIVISION
    : &T A1 ROUTE t . COX 4«K
    : C&AICSVILLF. WV 262U5
    ' ill IIUNI t R/< 304 1 742-55ft 1
    . KENNETH JOHNSON/« 304I742-5SO1
    : s?
    ISLAND CNIkK ClUl COMPANY
    : NORTHERN DIVISION
    : STAR ROUT F 1 . BOX 4«l
    : CRAICSVJLIE. MV 26205
    JIM UUNTI-¦/4 304 » 74 2-S50 1
    . It NNFTII JOHNSON/ t Mi 4 » 74 J - 1
    : sa
    . ONAR MINING COMPANY
    : f 0. BOX 338
    : NAD 1 SON, UV 2 5|30
    : RICHARD ZI<>NOND/Oe4l 369- 104 1
    ' SCOT f Y 1 SON/l304>369- 104|
    59
    . SLAB FORK COAL COMPANY *
    :
    ADRIAN NCK1NNEY/«364>767-372C
    NCMANCE ICSOUK (S. INC
    ROX ISIS
    VILLI ANSON. WV 7*661
    ODFL ROJFRS/
    

    -------
    : »m
    Tour A N V IANF AND AHPIfSS
    IMUI (OUTAri/rRONI
    III II Mil AC 1 "NT A< T/rtMl»t
    . 11
    iCTui ciii-¦ iinfs roaroamoii
    i433A
    . 62
    PAflDFE AH1) CURTIN lUIAfcl COMPANY •
    :
    : MIKE CARPENTER/ < 3<14»t47- 5314
    : R3
    somarn oiiio coai. coirtM
    r O. iOI 552
    r A IIHONT , WV 26SSS
    ; ill BALI r ¦1AKO/«3U413G6'55I5
    : 1 A NFS BCt ALHEM/*3IM« 366-551S
    r,4
    <11 o IM 1JJAI COHl ANY
    r 0. BOX 47
    IHiriM wv 7S694
    : R A R1 l>S J 1 Alio/004 1 426-0BO4
    . (SID y IAINAin/(.104N:f-Mll(M
    : es
    triMOSOl POWER HOUSE coai cunpant
    r.o »oi 2?n
    VIMPSUR HEIGHTS. W
    : WILLIAM 1 HATUCUS/t304i3V4-S3S7
    : DANIEL P rA|HH/On4t 194-*1l»| *
    . yiii Ui lusvukin
    • Oil «f
    

    -------
    SECTION 5.1.3
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    OR SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    In-Depth Investigation Program:
    Acid Mine
    AUTHOR:
    (OR INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION:
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    West Virginia University
    Department of Geology (for USEPA
    Region III)
    December, 19 86
    Consolidation Coal Company,
    Northern West Virginia Region
    (Monongalia, Marion, and
    Harrison Counties), West
    Virginia, USEPA Region III
    Coal mining
    BRIEF SEMARJf/NOTES: Consolidation owns and operates 21 injection wells of three
    basic types: 1) Sludge disposal wells used to dispose of precipitate from
    settling impoundments into abandoned portions of deep mines; 2) Leachate
    transfer wells used to inject leachate frcm gcb piles to permit flow to a
    centrally located downdip treatment facility; and 3) Acid mine water transfer
    wells used to inject acid mine v^ter into the updip portions of abandoned mines
    so that it can flow to a downdip treatment facility.
    In the study area, Consolidation is mining the Pittsburg coal seam and overlying
    Sewickley coal seam. Natural flow of groundwater has resulted in pooling at the
    down-dip extremities of the abandoned portion of the mine. Acid water is pumped
    to an AMD treatment plant, where it is treated with line, oxygenated, and
    discharged to the surface.
    Pooling of acid mine water occurs in other abandoned areas of the mine.
    Consolidation needed to purrp this water to the central treatment facility, so
    five injection wells were constructed to accomplish this. Total daily injection
    volume is about 960,000 gallons.
    The report concludes that this procedure, if properly managed, is
    environmentally prudent and will not adversely affect USDW. Areas of concern
    are:
    1.	Construction of wells: Construction requirements are not incorporated into
    the environmental permit.
    2.	Hydrostatic head build-up in dcwn dip portions: Injection of acid mine
    water, if it results in excessive hydrostatic head, could cause outcrop
    "seeps" or "blowouts".
    3.	Water quality changes: These have not been quantified, but it is inportant
    that all effluent water quality standards addressed in permits are iret.
    [5-77]
    

    -------
    V. In-Depth Investigation Program
    Acid Mine Water Transfer Wells
    A) Facility Selection Methodology
    The facility selected to do an in-depth investigation into
    Acid Mine Water Transfer Wells was selected using the following
    criteria:
    1} Availability of file information: The facility should
    have an abundance of file information to reduce the
    need for extensive field investigation.
    2) Number of wells operated by a single facility: The
    number of wells at a single facility should be high
    to reduce travel time during the assessment.
    Based upon these criteria, the Class V facility chosen to
    make an assessment on Acid Mine Water Transfer Wells was Consolida-
    tion Coal Company, Northern West Virginia Region. Consolidation
    owns and operates twenty-one injection wells over a three county
    area (Monongalia, Marion and Harrison). These wells can be
    broken down into three basic categories:
    1)	Sludge Disposal: Wells used to dispose of AMD preci-
    pitate into the abandoned portions of deep mines.
    The precipitate originates from settling impoundments
    associated with treatment facilities. Consolidation
    operates two sludge disposal wells at this facility.
    2)	Leachate Transfer Wells: Wells used to inject (gravity
    feed) leachate which is collected from gob piles into
    an updip portion of an abandoned deep mine so that the
    [5-78]
    

    -------
    leachate may flow to a centrally located downdip
    treatment facility where, as like other acid mine
    water, it is removed from the mine, treated and
    finally discharged to the surface. Consolidation
    operates one well of this type in the Northern West
    Virginia Region.
    3) Acid Mine Water Transfer Wells: Wells used to inject
    (gravity feed) acid mine water into the updip portions
    of abandoned deep mines so that it can flow to a down-
    dip, centrally located, treatment facility. The acid
    mine water is removed from the mine, treated and dis-
    charged to the surface. Consolidation operates 19
    wells of this type in their Northern West Virginia
    Region.
    B) Investigation Methodology
    The objective of this assessment is to determine the
    impact of Acid Mine Water Transfer (AMWT) wells on underground
    sources of drinking water (USDW's). The AMWT injection wells to
    be studied are located over a (two) county area (Monongalia,
    Harrison) of Northern West Virginia. The Company which owns and
    operates the injection wells is the Consolidation Coal Company
    (Consolidation). In the study area, Consolidation is deep
    mining the Pittsburgh coal seam and the overlying Sewickley coal
    seam.
    West Virginia UIC personnel visited Consolidation Coal
    Company, Northern West Virginia Region, to gain a better understanding
    of the Class V activity ongoing at this facility. UIC personnel
    [5-79]
    

    -------
    were accompanied by Consolidation employees to each of the
    injection sites. Specifics as to the nature of the injection
    operation at each site were discussed. Subsequent to the field
    investigation, extensive file information was gathered from
    DWR's Coal Section concerning Consolidation's operation in
    Northern West Virginia. However, the information was not specific
    to the activity to be assessed. U1C personnel evaluated the
    information and determined that the best and swiftest method of
    assessing the activity would be to select a mode "manageable"
    sub-area within the larger study area which would have transfer
    value to the entire study area as well as to areas of similar
    activity throughout the state. One such area was selected.
    The sub-area that was selected for the purpose of this
    assessment lies approximately 2.5 miles west of Morgantown,
    West Virginia. Within this sub-area the Pittsburgh coal seam is
    currently being mined. The overlying Sewickley seam has been
    mined out in this area. The Sewickley seam is dipping to the
    southwest causing natural ground water flow in the mine to be in
    that direction. The result is the pooling of water in the most
    down-dip portion of the abandoned mine in the area of the Sears
    Impoundment.
    Consolidation Coal Company constructed and AMD treatment
    plant (Sears AMD Treatment Plant) over the most down dip portion
    of the Sewickley seam in this area. The treatment plant receives
    mine water which is pumped from the Sewickley mine. This plant
    was constructed to treat AMD and thus protect the underlying
    portions of the Pittsburgh coal, which are currently being
    mined, from the danger of the increasing head in the Sewickley.
    [5-801
    

    -------
    The acid mine water is pumped from the Sewickley mine, treated
    with lime, oxygenated and then discharged to the surface after
    the precipitant is settled out in the Sears impoundment.
    There are portions of the mined Pittsburgh coal seam that
    underly the Sewickley in this area that also pool ground water.
    Consolidation has a need to pump acid mine water from the Pittsburgh
    seam in several locations (down-dip) within the sub-area to
    protect the working portions (up-dip) of the mines in the Pittsburgh.
    To avoid the need for constructing an AMD treatment facility at
    every withdrawal point from the Pittsburgh or transferring the
    mine water to some other existing treatment facility, Consolidation
    constructed five injection wells which would inject water from
    the Pittsburgh into the abandoned Sewickley where the acid mine
    water flows to the down-dip point of withdrawal at the Sears
    Treatment Plant. Therefore, in addition to the AMD resulting
    from natural ground water flow into the Sewickley mine, five
    additional sources are pumped into the abandoned Sewickley. The
    following is a list of the injection wells which inject into the
    Sewickley.
    The abandoned mine is simply used as a conduit for the transfer
    of AMD.
    Name
    Volume
    No. 1 Jere
    6 Right
    Loar
    Vallotto
    Hess
    60,000 GPD
    150,000 GP0
    200,000 GPD
    400,000 GPD
    150,000 GPD
    [5-81]
    

    -------
    C. Summary of Facility Investigation
    Ground water pooling in the down-dip portion of abandoned
    deep mines is an inevitable consequence of deep mining in general.
    To reduce the head by dewatering active mines is a common practice
    and necessitates treating the acid mine water before ultimately
    discharging it to the surface water. The Class V injection
    activity associated with Consolidation's operation is also not
    unique.
    The injection of acid mine water into abandoned mines for
    the purpose of transferring it to a centrally located treatment
    facility, if properly managed, would seem to be an environmentally
    prudent practice. When these abandoned mines exist and the
    configuration of the mine is known, the Acid Mine Water Transfer
    Method is superior to the transportation of this water along the
    surface by either truck or pipeline. The use of abandoned mines
    is relatively inexpensive and eliminates the chance of a surface
    spill which could ultimately contaminate shallow fresh water
    aquifers.
    Even though this practice seems to be an excellent method
    to protect shallow USDW's, there are several areas of concern
    that should be addressed:
    1) Construction of the Injection Wells: The construction
    requirements of these wells are not incorporated into the environ-
    mental permit associated with this facility. These wells must
    be constructed properly to ensure that no water from USDW's
    penetrated by the well can flow down the borehole and into the
    mine thus dewatering a potable aquifer. Additionally, proper
    [5-82]
    

    -------
    construction precludes the introduction of the injectant (AMD)
    into shallow USDW's. Historically, the adequacy of construction
    of.wells into mines has not been looked at from a ground water
    protection standpoint. The primary concern was to minimize the
    volume of water entering the mine. In addition, comprehensive
    well abandonment plans are not required to assure that the wells
    are properly plugged and abandoned.
    2)	Hydrostatic Head Build-up in the Down-dip Portions of
    Abandoned Mines: If, by the addition of injected acid mine
    water, the water within the mine is allowed to build excessive
    hydrostatic head over time, the possibility of outcrop "seeps"
    and "blowouts" increases. The rate of buildup and withdrawal of
    water in addition to the barrier thicknesses in the mines must
    be examined to insure that the possibility of mine "blowouts"
    and excessive "seeps" are minimized. The problems associated
    with head buildup in abandoned portions of mines may, at some
    point in time, need to be a concern of the UIC program, however,
    these concerns are currently addressed by the Coal Section of
    the DWR. The Coal Section uses standard formulas to calculate
    the necessary barrier thickness, given certain other conditions,
    to prevent seepage or blowouts in outcropping areas and mine-to-mi
    leakage.
    3)	Water Quality Changes: It is difficult to predict the
    change in water quality that acid mine water may undergo as it
    travels through an abandoned mine. However, this may not be a
    critical point of concern. The permits under which the AMD
    treatment plants operate establish effluent standards of water
    quality. If all other aspects of the injection operation are
    

    -------
    functioning properly and all of the injected water is being
    withdrawn, any changes in water quality within the mine are
    no-concern.
    

    -------
    Diane Smith
    West Virginia University
    Department of Geology
    and Geography
    4 2 5 White Hall
    Morgantown, WV 26505
    (304) 293-5603
    December 30, 1986
    David Long
    erground Infection Control Program
    ision of Water Resources
    0 Greenbrier Street
    rleston, WV 25311
    r fir. Long:
    Attached is an interim cop/ of t.he summary
    earch report for the U.S. Environmental Protection
    icy. Please be advised that we have still not
    sived analyses from samples sent to the Department
    Natural Resources laboratories anywhere from one or
    ^ months ago. We underst and that a person
    jonsible for atomic absorption Metal analyses has
    Eered a heart, attack and that we may not expect to
    iive the analyses soon. If this situation has
    ">yed, please advise. The analyses are crucial to us
    3ur endeavor to provide a complete final report to
    Please note that inventory information is
    /ided at the back of the report for your use in
    /iding EPA with information on the injection wells.
    ¦The organization of the report is planned as
    Lows: The introduction to the report includes
    Lions on background and previous research, as well
    stating the problem and the scope of the research
    >rt. The background and previous research sections
    ain information on the nature and origin of sludge
    slurry wastes, their interaction with water, its
    Laceinent into mines and any information which was
    \d concerning the environmental impact of this
    *ti ce.
    The results section of the report will be
    livided into three sections: the inventory data
    tssment, the assessment of the mine sites studied in
    lil and an overall assessment. Conclusions alluded
    .n the results section will be listed separately one
    one at the end of the text of the report. The
    intory data assessment, subsection of the results
    [5-85]
    

    -------
    In the conclusions section, a summary of major
    conclusions and recommendations will be presented. The
    reference section will include all published and
    unpublished written information drawn upon in the
    report. Personal oral and written comrnuni ca t ion
    references will also be included in t lie references.
    The appendices section shall include the
    followi ng:
    Appendix A - Tabularized information for each
    disposal project and separately, additional
    information on many disposal projects either
    to clarify tabularized information or to
    present additional data which did not lend
    itself to easy tabularization.
    Appendix B - Results of Mann-rthitney I) Tests used
    to determine the significance of observed trends
    in water quality data.
    Appendix C - Laboratory analyses of water and
    waste samples obtained in the field at mines used
    for detailed study.
    Appendix D - The listing of statistics ran on the
    water quality data submitted by the coal companies
    that was used for the statistical analyses.
    Appendix E - Listing of existing raw water quality
    data submitted by the coal industry.
    Appendix F - Method of statistical testing,
    including the fortran programs used to generate
    Mann-Whitney U Values and tied observation values.
    Appendix G - Methods of converting tons of solids
    to million gallons, showing one sample calculation
    and a listing of the original and converted data
    from disposal projects where this conversion was
    necessary.
    Appendix H - Tables showing information compiled
    on mining chemicals commonly used in coal prepar-
    ation and in acid mine drainage treatment.
    Appendix I - Preliminary and detailed question-
    naires and memorandums sent to the coal industry
    to compile information on the disposal of slurry
    or sludge into underground mines.
    [5-86]
    

    -------
    Confidential information such as the name and
    address of the coal companies, mine, source of waste,
    phone numbers and names of contact persons will be
    provided separately to the state. Also, files
    maintained for each disposal project will be presented
    to the state upon completion of the project.
    To give you an update on the current status of the
    research effort, at the present time the main
    introductory section, including the objectives,
    background, previous research, and methods of
    investigation sections are completed and are in the
    process of being reviewed.
    Data analysis for the results and conclusions
    sections is completed save the outstanding analyses
    previously mentioned. Late receipt of water quality
    information from two mines slowed down this process so
    that it was only completed in early December. Despite
    this, approximat.ey three-quarters of the results and
    conclusions section has been written. It is estimated
    that the results and conclusion sections will be
    completed and ready for review (pending receipt of
    laboratory analyses) by the fifth of January. If we do
    not receive the analyses we expect from DNR, the final
    report will have to be written without them, since the
    final deadline is imminent..
    Sincerely,
    Diane Smith
    Geology Graduate Student
    West Virginia Univesity
    [5-37]
    

    -------
    SECTION 5.1.4
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (OR SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    From Underground Injection
    Operations in Texas: A Classi-
    fication and Assessment of Under-
    ground Injection Activities;
    Report 291
    AUTHOR:
    (OR INVESTIGATOR)
    Ben F. Knape, Texas Department of
    Water Resources
    DATE:
    December 1984
    FACILITY NAME AND
    LOCATION:
    Terlingua, Texas, USEPA Region III
    NATURE OF BUSINESS
    Not applicable
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES: These wells are typically defined as those
    that are drilled into mined-out portions of subsurface mines for
    the purpose of filling them by injection of a slurry of sand,
    mill tailings, or other solids. This definition does not apply
    "strictly" to mine backfilling in Texas.
    The first mine backfill "wells" are part of a recent project
    involving the sealing off or filling of some abandoned Terlingua
    mercury mines in Brewscer County. The plans provide that shalts
    deeper than 100 feet will be sealed off by emplacement of steel
    grates in concrete collars. Shallower shafts will be filled with
    local soils and mine spoil removed in digging original shafts and
    mine workings. These are referred to as mine backfill wells
    because of their dimensions.
    The project area is dominantly characterized by Cretaceous marine
    limestones and shales intruded by numerous Tertiary dikes,
    loccoliths and plugs. The lowermost unit that has yielded
    commercial quantities of mercury is the Santa Elena limestone,
    which locally yields potable water and is the most important
    aquifer in the area. Typical depths of this aquifer range from
    700 to 800 feet, and very little groundwater occurs above these
    depths. Consequently, the backfill project will be essentially
    dry, occurring several hundred feet above groundwater.
    Rainfall or runoff may constitute a source of recharge, but this
    is believed to be minor in that the project area is within the
    Chihuahuan desert, an area characterized by less than 12 inches
    of rainfall annually. Traces of mercury in the mine backfill
    material are considered an insignificant source of groundwater
    contamination relative to pre-existing contamination by in-place
    mercury.
    [5-88]
    

    -------
    MINE BACKFILL WELLS
    Table of Contents
    Page
    Introduction		12-1
    Geohydrology		12-2
    Stratigraphy and Structure		12-3
    Aquifers		12-3
    Abandoned Mine Project Ground-Water Impact		12-4
    Legal and Jurisdictional Considerations		12-5
    Concluding Statement		12-5
    References		12-6
    12-hi	[5-89]
    

    -------
    MINE BACKFILL WELLS
    Introduction
    Mine backfill wells are usually defined as wells drilled into mined-out portions of subsurface
    mines for the purpose of filling them by injection of a slurry of sand, mill tailings, or other solids.
    The term "mine backfill wells" has also been used in a different sense in reference to water wells
    or monitor welts drilled into backfill of surface mines This use of the term will not be considered
    further in this chapter.
    Only four underground mines are believed to be active in Texas: two salt mines, a limestone
    mine, and an abandoned silver mine being reactivated. None of these mines are believed ever to
    have utilized mine backfill wells in their operations As far as can be determined, this technique of
    backfilling underground mines has never before been utilized in the State
    The largest, and at one time the most important, underground mines in Texas are those of the
    Ter lingua mercury district and smaller genetically related districts in the Trans-Pecos region Now
    completely abandoned, the very extensive Terltngua district workings yielded over 150.000
    76-pound flasks of mercury from a number of mines during the first half of the present century
    The Chisos Mine alone has over 23 miles of underground workings.
    A recent project involved sealing off or filling some of the abandoned Terlingua mercury
    mines and prospect workings. This project included the first use of mine backfill wells in Texas.
    The Terlingua mercury district, which includes the mine backfill project area, is in southern
    Brewster County about 80 miles south of the City of Alpine and consists of a rather narrow band
    extending westerly from the town of Study Butte for about 20 miles. The mining district lies just
    north of the western portion of Big Bend National Park as shown in Figure 12-1 The Terlingua
    Abandoned Mine Land Project encompasses an area within the Terlingua mercury district
    extending westerly from Study Butte along Farm to Market Road 170 (FM 1 70) about 16 miles to
    near Lajitas Mesa.
    The major industry in this sparsely populated area is tourism. During the tourist season
    accomodations in and near Big Bend National Park are in short supply. Many tourists travel FM
    170 enroute to and from facilities in Lajitas. Adobe and stone ruins associated with the former
    mine activity are clearly visible from FM 170. The land is almost entirely unfenced. and tourists
    attracted by the ruins can unknowingly enter areas rendered extremely dangerous by the pres-
    ence of open and unmarked shafts. In 1982, a boy fell almost 300 feet to his death in one of the
    shafts, and in mid-1983 another person was reported missing in the area. Probably hundreds of
    shafts and prospect workings exist within the mercury district. Only a limtted number, ail easily
    accessible from FM 170. are included in the project.
    12-1
    [5-90]
    

    -------
    103° 00'
    TERUNGUA
    Ll|iUi
    29*
    00"
    S Miln
    103° 30'
    Figure 12-1.—Location of the Tertingua Mercury District in Trans-Pecos
    Texas (Modified after Sharps. 1980)
    Geohydrology
    The Terlingua area is part of the Chihuahuan desert, which is characterized by an arid
    subtropical climate. Annual rainfall averages less than 12 inches, most of which occurs during
    the late summer months. Summer rains are often torrential and are usually highly localized.
    Vegetation is sparse to moderate in density, consisting mainly of desert forms such as yucca,
    cacti, and agave. Creosote bush, mesquite, and catclaw occur mainly along usually dry water-
    courses. The few trees in the area are cottonwoods which grow along the major arroyos. The
    abandoned mine area is located in a heavily dissected terrane of rocky slopes and ravines. Its
    elevation ranges from about 2.500 to 3.300 feet.
    12-2
    [5-91]
    

    -------
    Stratigrapny ana quu>.iu.»
    The rock strata of concern in the Terlingua area are Cretaceous sediments, dominantly
    limestone and shale. These are intruded by Tertiary sills, dikes, laccoliths, and plugs of variable
    igneous composition. Faults and tectonic fractures are abundant. The stratigraphic nomenclature
    utilized herein is that of the Emory Peak-Presidio Sheet of the Geologic Atlas of Texas (Bureau of
    Economic Geology, 1979).
    The oldest stratigraphic unit entered by the deeper mine shafts of concern is the Santa Elena
    Limestone of late Lower Cretaceous age Mercury is not known to occur in significant quantities
    below the upper pan of the Santa Elena. The Santa Elena Limestone is white to light gray, fine
    grained, and massive in character. Its thickness is unknown in the project area, but elsewhere in
    the Big Bend region it is known to range from about 500 feet to more than 900 feet. The Santa
    EJena is the primary aquifer in the Terlingua district.
    Overlying the Santa Elena is the Del Rio Clay, which ranges up to about 180 feet in thickness.
    The Del Rio is dominantly bluish to gray structureless clay with some interbedded flaggy
    limestone
    Less than 100 feet of Buda Limestone overlies the Del Rio The Buda is a grayish white
    limestone containing a middle member which is argillaceous and marly
    The Boquillas Formation, the basal unit of the Upper Cretaceous, is the most prominently
    exposed unit in the project area. The lower Ernst Member is a bluish gray, flaggy, silty limestone
    grading tosiltstone; the overlying San Vicente Member consists of thin to medium bedded, chalky,
    argillaceous limestone flags interbedded with gray mart.
    The Pen Formation overlies the Boquillas. The Pen, the youngest formation of pertinence to
    the Terlingua mining project, is about 1,000 feet thick in the area and consists dominantly of clay,
    which is calcareous with thin chalk beds in the lower part and sandy with some sandstone beds in
    the upper part.
    With one notable exception, to be discussed, the Tertian/ igneous intrusions in the region
    have no direct relationship with the hydrology of the project area and need not be considered here
    These intrusions also lack a direct relationship with the mercury mineralization, which took place
    later, although there is probably an indirect genetic relation in that the intrusions may have
    differentiated at depth from the same parent magma that was the later source of mercury-bearing
    hydrothermal solutions.
    Aquifers
    Because of complex faulting of the rock formations and extreme paucity of well data m the
    area, few generalized statements can be made regarding the hydrology of the Terlingua area
    other than to say that the Santa Elena often yields potable water and is the most important aquifer
    known m the area. Ragsdale (1976) records that when the Chisos Mine shafts penetrated beiow
    the 700-foot level, a targe quantity of water unsuitable for household use was encountered and
    sealed off Usable water was later discovered near the 800-foot level. The usable water undoubt-
    edly came from the Santa Elena, but the source beds of the unusable water must be considered
    12-3
    [5-92]
    

    -------
    any report of water being encountered. It is probably safe to state that in most of the project area
    there is no ground water above a depth of several hundred feet.
    A major exception to the preceding statement occurs in the vicinity of Study Butte at the
    eastern extremity of the project area. The Study Butte intrusion, of fine-grained quartz soda
    syenite, forms the hill of the same name. It is intruded into clays of the Pen Formation. The
    intrusion is" cut by abundant joints and fractures, enabling it to function as a local aquifer This
    intrusion is mentioned here because a mine shaft located near the road at Study Butte is part of
    the abandoned mine project. The shaft will be covered by a steel grating and is not one of the
    proposed mine backfill wells. The water level in the shaft is about 20 feet below land surface,
    approximately where water was encountered when the shaft was first opened.
    Abandoned Mine Project Ground-Water Impact
    The Terhngua Project plans provide that the mine shafts deeper than about 100 feet will be
    sealed off by emplacement of steel grates in concrete collars at the shaft openings at ground
    surface These deep mine shafts, at least near the surface, are roughly square to rectangular m
    horizontal section In contrast, the shafts and various prospect workings shallower than this
    arbitrary depth are to be filled with available solids which will include local soils and mine spoii
    Shafts and workings of the shallower category will be regarded as mine backfill "wells." being
    generally deeper than they are wide The backfill wells are highly variable in shape and size While
    the deeper of these backfill wells resemble the deepest mine shafts in cross-sectional size and
    geometry, some of the shallower ones may be little more than infillmgs of irregularty oblong pits
    barely large enough for one man to have worked with hand tools.
    Unlike more conventional mine backfill wells, the injected materials for theTerlingua project,
    usually consisting mainly of spoil removed in digging the original shafts and prospect workings,
    will be essentially dry, as will the wells themselves. As mentioned earlier, ground water is not
    known to occur above a depth of several hundred feet in the project area, except in the local Study
    Butte aquifer The ground-water contamination potential of the project is apparently nil
    It is of course recognized that any open shaft into permeable sediments or any shaft backfilled
    with permeable material which is allowed to collect rainfall or runoff may constitute a minor
    source of water recharge to the unsaturated zone overlying the local aquifers. The possibility of
    mobilization of toxic mercury compounds from mine tailings used as backfill should be insignifi-
    cant. considering that the possible effect of the mercury ore minerals on the water quality of the
    local aquifers has been a natural and pre-existing condition in the Terhngua mine district.
    The only practicable alternative to the methods proposed (i.e.. steel gratings at shaft open-
    ings. and use of mine backfill wells) is the erection of fences around the shafts. This option would
    be more expensive, and as demonstrated by fenced shafts in Big Bend National Park, would
    involve heavy maintenance expense. Some tourists have already tried to climb or burrow under
    fences around shafts in the park.
    1 2-4
    [5-33]
    

    -------
    Legal and Jurisdictional Considerations
    To eliminate the dangers of open mine shafts, the Governor declared a state of emergency on
    December 3. 1982. and requested federal assistance for the Terlingua Abandoned Mine Land
    Project. As a result, the Railroad_Commission of Texas received an AdmimstrativeGr ant for funds
    under Section 409 of Public ijw 95-87 (Abandoned Mine Land Program) to remedy the hazard-
    ous situation. Railroad Commission personnel have identified 88 mine shafts or prospect work-
    ings within the mercury district which are easily accessible from FM 170 and, therefore,
    constitute public hazards.
    The Department's authority under Chapter 27 of the Texas Water Code extends to regulation
    of injection wells. It has been determined that, for regulatory purposes, the shallower group of
    shafts and workings which are to be filled with solids are mine backfill wells, a category of Class V
    injection wells.
    Concluding Statement
    It has been shown that the Terlingua mine backfill project should have no impact upon
    ground-water resources. If other mine backfill wells should be proposed in the future, their
    potential effect upon ground-water quality should be evaluated on a case by case basis
    12-5
    [5-94]
    

    -------
    Bureau of Economic Geology, 1979, Geologic atlas of Texas, Emory Peak-Presidio sheet: Univ.
    Texas. Bur. Econ. Geol. map.
    Hulbert. M. A.. 1983. Backfill monitoring methods: Ground Water Monitoring Review, Winter
    1983. p. 100-102.
    Ragsdale. K. B.. 1976. Quicksilver. Terlingua and the Chisos Mining Company: Texas A&M
    University Press. College Station, Texas.
    Railroad Commission of Texas. 1983a, Environmental assessment of the Terlingua abandoned
    mine project, Brewster County, Texas: File report, Austin. Texas.
    	1983b, Supplement for environmental assessment of the Terlingua abandoned mine
    project, Brewster County, Texas: File report, Austin, Texas.
    Sharpe, R. D, 1980, Development of the mercury mining industry- Trans-Pecos Texas- Univ
    Texas. Bur Econ Geology, Mineral Resources Circular 64
    Yates. R. D , and Thompson, G. A., 1959, Geology and quicksilver deposits of the Terlingua
    district. Texas U S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 312.
    12-6
    [5-95]
    

    -------
    SECTION 5.1.5
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (OR SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    From Missouri Underground
    Injection Control Program Class V
    Assessment
    AUTHOR:
    (OR INVESTIGATOR)
    Not available
    DATE:
    December 1986
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION: Missouri, USEPA Region VII
    NATURE OF BUSINESS
    Not applicable
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES: This portion of the Missouri study
    addresses the Tri-State Mining District, where numerous shafts
    communicating surface water and groundwater still exist. Zinc
    and lead mining was conducted in a four-quadrangle area around
    Joplin, and 500 million metric rock tons were mined from 1848 to
    1970. After the mines were closed, the abandoned workings were
    allowed to flood, causing such environmental and safety hazards
    as subsidence, numerous open shafts and water-filled pits, and
    local influence on surface water due to seepage from tailings
    piles and artesian flow from mine workings.
    Zinc and lead ore deposits were recovered from Mississippian
    cherty limestones (>400' thick) which are also considered to
    compose a shallow aquifer in the area. Recharge to this aquifer
    is local and often direct, and some of the open pit lakes are
    probably hydrostatically connected. A deeper aquifer is made up
    of Cambrian-Ordovician strata and is the major drinking water
    supply for the area. Recharge areas to this aquifer lie outside
    the region of interest.
    Groundwater sampled from the abandoned mine workings generally
    exceeds level for cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc set forth by
    the Public Health Department in 1962. Sodium and iron levels are
    often noted to be adversely high. It is recommended that water
    wells should be effectively cased across this shallower aquifer
    so that production is from the deep aquifer only.
    The use of concrete on metal inverted pyramids, covered with mine
    tailings, has been proposed for backfilling. This would permit
    economical mine re-entry in the future if ore prices increase.
    [5-96]
    

    -------
    7. MINE BACK-FILLED WELLS
    7.1. Introduction
    Mine back-filled wells are usually defined as wells drilled into
    mined-out portions of subsurface mines for the purpose of filling them by
    injection of a slurry of sand, mill tailings, or other solids. The UIC
    Program in the State of Missouri would like to see the term redefined to
    include shafted mine entrances as these constitute a connection between
    subsurface aquifers and surface waters.
    The State of Missouri has a long history of mining, both surface and
    underground workings, and consequently has numerous shafts that
    corrcnunicate surface water and groundwater. These shafts pose numerous
    problems in the area of groundwater protection. For the purpose of this
    study, we will look at four quadrangles in the vicinity of Joplin,
    Missouri (Figure 7-1). These quadrangles are located in the Missouri
    portion of the Tri-State Mining District and constitute the largest area
    of mining in the State this area also includes most of the lairge mining
    subdistricts.
    From 1848 to 1970 the Tri-State Mining District of Missouri, Kansas
    and Oklahoma produced zinc and lead concentrates worth over 2 billion
    dollars. The ore production from this district, which ranks as the world's
    largest, exceeds 500 million metric rock tons. Within the District zinc
    ores were about six times as abundant as those of lead. The removal of
    42
    

    -------
    O WACO
    CARL. JUNCTION
    WE9B CITY
    WEBB CITY
    CARL JUNCTION
    _IN EAST °PROSP£*ITY
    WEST
    JASPER CO.
    NEWTON CO."
    JASPER
    NEWTON
    CO
    CQ
    KAN
    OKLA.
    AMI
    • lUHcnn
    FIGURE 7-1
    LOCATION :-!An S.IQ'.'IT SHQY AREA
    [5-98]
    

    -------
    the mineralized beds created large underground voids, some with very thin
    weak ceilings. The stripping of the ore bearing support pillars at the
    end of the raining activity lead to increased roof instability. Following
    shut-down of the mining operations, the underground workings were allowed
    to flood. The abandoned mines now pose several types of safety and
    environmental hazards to area residents. Subsidence or sinking of the
    ground surface has resulted from roof collapse above the mine workings.
    There are numerous open shafts and water-filled pits throughout the
    region. Local surface water quality has also been effected -fay rain water
    runoff and seepage frcm mine waste piles and by artisan flow of polluted
    mine water from open shafts. These problems have been recognized for seme
    trr.e, but there has been no concentrated effort to correct them.
    7.2. Geohvdroloav
    7.2.1. Geoloav Stratioraphv and Structure
    The zinc lead ore deposits of the Tri-State region are in chert'/
    Mississippian limestones. The chert occurs as nodules in limestones and
    as inter-bedded layers. From oldest to youngest, the Pierson, Fernglen,
    Reeds Spring, Elsey, Grand Falls, Burlington, Keokuk, Warsaw, and
    Carterville Formations were host rocks for most of the zinc/lead
    mineralization. Their total thickness in area exceeds 400 feet. Small
    outliers of Pennsylvania!! Cherokee formation shales and sandstones lie
    unconformably on top of the Mississippian rocks in some localities. Rich
    ore bodies are associated with these Pennsylvanian sediments where they
    43
    

    -------
    have filled dissolution structures, sinkholes, and collapses in the
    Mississippian strata.
    Throughout the Tri-State district extensive chemical dissolution of
    carbonate rock produced horizontal and vertical channels, porous breccia
    zones, insoluble cherts, and other subsurface cavities. These voids
    proved excellent repositories for ore precipitation and concentration of
    mineralized fluids.
    The structure in the area is limited to gentle folding, the axis
    generally plunging northwest. The regional 1° dip of the sedimentary
    formations is also northwestward away from the Ozark uplift. The Joplm
    anticline and adjacent Webb City syncline are believed to have influenced
    the localization of rich trends of mineralization around Joplin in Webb
    City. Minor faulting and fracturing provided increased zones of rock
    dissolutions and eventually channels for ore bearing fluids.
    7.2.2. Acuifers
    Two major aquifers are available for water production in the area.
    The Mississippian strata act as one unit, the Cambrian Ordovician strata
    is a second. The first unit will be called the shallow aquifer in this
    reDort and the second unit is referred to as the deep aquifer. These two
    units are hydrostatically separated with the piezeometric surface of the
    shallow aquifer higher than that of the deeper aquifer. The recharge
    areas for the deep aquifers lie outside of the area except for local
    44
    [5-100]
    

    -------
    seepage through the Northview and the Chattoonaga formations. Recharge of
    the shallow aquifer is local and is quite often direct. Local drainage in
    some areas discharges directly into abandoned mine workings during periods
    of rainfall. Some of the open pit lakes are probably hydrostatically
    connected to the shallow aquifer system. Springs, the majority of which
    are located along Shoal Creek, all discharge from this shallow or
    Mississippian strata.
    Mine related water quality problems exist throughout the study. Many
    open shafts were found to have wet weather or perennial artisan flow of
    mine waters to the surface. Rain water runoff and seepage from the waste
    piles is also corrmon. The effects of these processes have been examined
    and some possible solutions proposed (3arks 1977, Warner 1977, and Stewart
    1980). Stability probLems arise as the downward movement of surface
    waters accelerates, causing the deterioration of ground adjacent to open
    shafts thus promoting further collapse. In addition, subsided areas
    experience increased widening of their parameters as well as further
    steepening and other undercutting of other slopes. Back filling or
    sealing of hazardous sites would greatly reduce the damaging affect of
    such waters as well as help to alleviate some of the ground water problems
    caused frcm the introduction of surface water into the aquifer(s).
    7.2.3. Abandoned Mine Groundwater Impact
    The purity of the majority of the water samples generally exceeded the
    reconsnended limits for cadmium, copper, iron, lead, and zinc set by the
    45
    [5-101]
    

    -------
    Public Health Service in 1962 for drinking water (Figure 7-2). However, a
    few samples with values for one or more metals in excess of these limits
    would indicate a need for some care in selection of water supplies for
    human consumption. Cadmium may represent the major hazard in this
    regard. Lead apparently presents no problem in this regard even though
    lead mineralization occurs in the district. Iron reached objectionable
    levels for normal household use in a number of samples though it does not
    normally present a health hazard. Sufficient copper and zinc are present
    in a number of samples to endanger some forms of aquatic life including
    seme species of fish. It should be noted that long and continued use of
    some polluted waters may contribute to health problems in ways not
    presently understood even though the heavy metal contents are belcw the
    recommended limits. The sodium content of some samples, especially those
    treated by some types of water softeners, may pose a problem to people
    requiring a low sodium diet. It would be wise for people with this
    problem to have a check made on the sodium content of their drinking water
    supplies. Water supplies having a known or suspected close connection to
    mining activities, i.e. open pit lakes, underground workings, or wells in
    mined areas should be tested prior to use to insure against contamination
    from such sources. Praperly cased deep wells where the shallow aquifers
    are sealed out are probably the safest source of water since they are not
    connected to mineralized ground at shallower depths. Due to the calcium
    magnesium contents all groundwater in the area is relatively hard and
    would be found objectionable for some special purpose uses.
    46
    [5-102]
    

    -------
    OBSERVED MRXIMUM CONCENTRRTIONS
    OF METRLS FOUND IN SURFRCE AND
    GROUNDWATER SAMPLES FROM THE
    JOPLIN, MISSOURI RRER
    Sample location
    STRERMS
    LFKES
    SPRINGS
    SHRLLOUJ UELLS
    DEEP UELLS
    RECOMMENDED LEVEL
    O.Oll
    0.48
    100
    150
    mg^l
    OBSERVED MRXIMUM CONCENTRRT I ONS
    OF METRLS FOUND IN SURFRCE FND
    GROUNDWATER SPILES FROM THE
    JOPLIN, MISSOURI RRER
    Sample location
    STRERMS
    LFKES
    SPRINGS
    SHRLLOU UELLS
    DEE? UELLS
    MRXIMUM RLLCUED
    0.045
    0.0015
    0.095
    | 0.029
    mg/1
    

    -------
    OBSERVED MfiXIhUM CQNCENTRflTIONS
    OF METRLS FOUND IN SURFRCE FIND
    GROUNDWATER Sn^LES FROM THE
    JOPLIN, MISSOURI RRER
    Sample location
    STREFMS
    LFKES
    SPRINGS
    ShlRLLOlJ UELLS
    DEEP UELLS
    MAXIMUM ALLOWED
    0.003
    0.0165
    
    0.GG8
    0.0125
    0.002
    HiW
    ¦ 1 ' 1
    0.01
    1 ' ' '
    J—L
    Cd
    O.GGO 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 0.025
    mg/1
    [5-104]
    

    -------
    The use of concrete or metal inverted pyramids as a closure method for
    these shafts has proven effective in a case study done in Galena, Kansas
    (Figure 7-3) (Dressel 1985). Considering the amount of back-fill material
    that is still present in the Joplm area, and the number of open shafts
    that occur within the study area (approximately 478 shafts) it would
    probably be of a more economic nature to put these inverted pyramids into
    the shaft openings and use the tailings piles as a cover after the
    emplacement of the pyramids. This procedure also allows for economical
    reentry of the mine should future prices warrant.
    It has been shown that the Joplin Tri-State District constitutes a
    major problem for groundwater in the area and that other areas, notably
    the Old Lead District and the new Virburnum Trend District, should be
    monitored. Back-filling of these nine shafts or the emplacement of
    pyramids in the shafts will probably be proposed in the future.
    Regardless of what decision that is reached on these mines the potential
    effects frcra any mine on the groundwater quality should be evaluated on a
    case by case basis.
    48
    [5-105]
    

    -------
    12'
    P
    L
    A
    N
    Pier
    .®35j5
    VoV-o^o
    •S^?«0-?6-°Sp
    ?.ofo:*^--o9.^
    0 •V*w*
    . iJr.-nV'£"T
    VnW'-O Of
    D* ^ Att A
    ^rP0Q.o^;
    /r^.v->£»n._
    -------
    SECTION 5.1.6
    TITLE OF STUDY:	Backfill Monitoring Methods
    (OR SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    AUTHOR:	March A. Hulbert
    (OR INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:	Winter 1983
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION: Not Applicable
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:	Not Applicable
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES: This study examines the most critical
    assumption in the prediction of post-mining hydrologic
    conditions: characterization of the replaced spoil material.
    Recommended approaches are intended to allow early definition of
    backfill properties and enhance understanding of spoil aquifer
    systems prior to full post-mining saturation and equilibration of
    the hydrologic system.
    The Surface Mine Control and Reclamation Act requirements
    necessitate the ability to predict and control re-establishment
    of the hydrologic system within backfill materials. Thjs level
    of prediction and control has not yet been achieved. However,
    many tools are presently available to begin to study and
    understand the characteristics of these new systems. These tools
    include geophysical logs if water can be retained in the
    wellbore, and pump, bail or slug tests to determine
    permeabilities of backfill aquifers as a whole.
    [5-107]
    

    -------
    BACKFILL MONITORING
    METHODS
    Predicting and controlling the reestablishment of the hydrologic system within
    backfill materials is discussed
    by Margery A Hulburt
    The 1977 Federal Surlaie Mine
    Control and Reclamation A( I regu
    lates surface mining operations with
    reaped lo environmental impact In
    the area ot ground-water hydrology
    l he Act includes t hree major ret) u 1 re
    ments The surface mining opera-
    lion must be designed to 1) pre-
    serve the hvdrologic balance of the
    area 2] prevent material damage to
    the hydrologic system off-site and
    3) minimize degradation of ground-
    water quality and quantity
    These requirements, when
    applied to the long-term, post-
    mining hydrologic system, become
    very difficult if not impossible to
    meet They imply not only the ability
    to accurately predict post-mining
    hvdrologic conditions, but also the
    ability to control development of the
    post-mining system through
    manipulation of mine operations
    design Both of these abilities are
    bevond the industry s current state
    of knowledge
    This article examines the single
    most critical assumption in the pre-
    diction of post-mining hydrologic
    conditions the character of the
    replaced spoil material Early studies
    of backfilled spoil in Montana and
    northern Wyoming are bnefh dis-
    cussed and recent findings in the
    Wyoming Powder River Basin are
    presented Based on these findings
    several alternative approaches to
    backfill testing and characterization
    are recommended These ap-
    proaches are intended to allow earlv
    definition of backfill properties and
    enhance understanding of spoil
    aquiler svstems prior to full post-
    mining saturation and equilibrium
    ol the h\c1rologic svstem
    Wyoming Powder River Basin
    One ol I lie largest surface mm
    able i(>cil reserves in ilie United
    States is lounci in ilie I'owder River
    Basin ol Wvoming 'I lu re .ire iur
    renil\ 15 surfate mines operating
    or under i onstrut tion in the liasin
    the oldest ol which has been active
    sin

    -------
    nditions. and 3) backfill aquifer
    iiismissivitv will bctomparable 10
    liat of the unmined coal These
    (-.sumptions have, in general, been
    11seel as the basis for predit t mg on-
    iikI olf-site post-mining hvdrologu
    (imdilions
    Recent Findings
    Backfill wells have been estab-
    lislied in recent years at the AMAX
    idle Ayr Mine, the Wvod.ik Ke-
    nirces Development Corp Mine
    he Kcrr-McGee Clovis Point and
    i.h obs Kanch Mines.and theAKCO
    I tl. u k Th u nder M1 ne. among ot hers
    <)l these sites, only Wyodak has
    ¦Oiown water in the backfill wells
    A bail test was performed on
    <	at h of two wells at the Wyodak
    operation. Pump testing was at-
    tempted. however the permeability
    u.is insufficient to allow sustained
    'peralinnofapump Thetest results
    idx.ited verv low transmissivities
    it tile order ol 5 gpd/ft Unlortu-
    n.itclv. baseline data are not avail
    .ible lor the site for either the coal or
    i ivcrburden aquifer Tests performed
    in I he area after mining began indi
    <	.itc an average coal transmissivm
    ol 500 gpd/ft and a range of overbur-
    den transmissmties from 1 to 38
    gpd/ft (Wyodak 1981)
    Slug tests were performed in
    'i.ickfill wells at the Kerr-McGee
    lovis Point and Jacobs Ranch oper-
    iiions In both cases it was found
    i lidt the wells could not be filled
    with water Evidently a highly per-
    meable zone exists which is able to
    .i< cept water as fast as it is injected
    preventing the well from filling to
    the top Transmissivities were calcu-
    lated for these permeable zones as
    *1 gpd/ft at theClovis Point siteand
    '•11 gpd/ft at the Jacobs Ranch site
    ! tie zones above the permeable lay -
    is could not be characterized
    l-ovver 1982)
    Initially, water was present in
    backfill wells constructed at the
    \MAX Belle Ayr Mine however once
    this water was removed, the wells
    remained dry (AMAX 1981) Backfill
    w ells have been constructed only
    recently at the ARCO Black Thunder
    Mine and have been dry since
    t mplacement (Glaze 1982)
    'ompanson With Early
    ¦Studies
    The results of backfill monitoring
    in the Wyoming Powder Ri\er Basin
    io date show that at the majority of
    i he sites tested, the replaced spoil
    materials have not yet recharged At
    "ne site, saturation has been found
    '"it with \ervlow permeability Sev-
    eral ((inclusions h.ivc been drawn
    Irom the results ol testing done so
    tar and indeed ba(klill conditions
    iim var\ Ix'tween mine sites
    Contrary to the Montana lind
    ings the Wvodak testing indicates
    that the backfill will saturate but
    that the permeability of the backfill
    aquifer will be much lower than the
    permeability of the unmmcd coal
    Instead backfill permeabilities
    appear to approximate pre-miiiing
    overburden values
    Kerr McGce C'lovis Point and
    Jacobs Ranch test data indicate
    that although the spoil materials
    are turrentlv dry. there is a high
    potential for development ofa viable
    aquifer upon resaturation of the
    backllll There is strong evidence lor
    development of a "base-ol-lilt aqui-
    fer near the bottom ol the replaced
    spoil Whether additional aquilers
    will form at the base ol higher lilts is
    unknovv n
    hvndence Irom the AMAX I lellc
    Avt Mine indie ales that the spoils
    mav neverresaturalctoa viable Ijack
    fill aquiler at this site Laboratory
    analvsis of the backfill material
    shows that it is predominant (lav
    and consists ol a high proportion ol
    swellingclavs AMAX has postulated
    that upon contact with water, clays
    within the backfill will swell and
    reduce spoil permeability to practi-
    cally nothing Based on this theory
    AMAX has initiated a sophisticated
    special handling program to segre-
    gate sandy overburden materials
    from the bulk of the spoil These
    sandv materials are then selectively
    replaced in the backfill to recreate
    permeable sand channel aquifers
    within the low penmeabihtv spoils
    (AMAX 1981)
    Post-Mining Hydrologic
    Systems
    Three post-mining hydrologic
    conditions can be postulated in the
    Wyoming Powder River Basin
    11 backfill aquifers will form with
    very low permeabilities 2) viable
    aquifers will form at the base of one
    or more lifts within the backfill, and
    3) backfill aquifers will not form
    Further testing may give rise to
    additional scenarios Each of these
    possible backfill conditions affects
    the overall post-mining hydrologic
    regime in a different way and
    requires us own level of mitigation
    to meet the requirements of the Sur-
    face Mine Control and Reclamation
    Act Clearlv time is required to prove
    the validitvof these postulates How-
    ever earlv monitonngand testingof
    backfill materials can indicate
    potential problems before the min-
    ing op( ration is too far undcrwav
    I he preliminary findings Irom
    the Wvnming Powder Kivn Hasm
    raise as main questions as tlicv
    answer (oncerning the hvdrologK
    nature ol backllll materials In the
    (asc of ,i low permeability backllll
    aquifer (he immediate question is
    whv the permeability is not great( r
    than it is U)V\ |>ernicabililv( mild lie
    due to the lilhologv ol the spoil
    materials the method ol spoil p!a< e
    nient or possiblv the difli* ultv in
    developmgba( klill wells adequatciv
    The uniformitv ol the spoils both
    vertically and laterallv is also ol
    interest, as is the question of
    changes in spoil |>ermcal>ilifv ovei
    time
    In I lie ( ase of b.u k I ill wells c on
    taming no water llieoverridiug( on
    tern is the potential lor ret harge ol
    I he spoils at some time in the Itit i in
    Saturation ol the backllll matciial
    m.iv simplv Ih 1
    interest part icularlv whet her or not
    they contain additional high per
    meability /.ones Finally, thecauseol
    the permeable laver is of interest
    Testing of Backfill Materials
    New approaches to backllll test-
    ing can provide additional hvdro-
    logit information and predictive
    data before saturation occurs allow
    mg earlv modilication ol mining
    and redamaiton techniques il
    neeessarv It is recommended that
    five areas be investigated in existing
    backfilled spoil 1) geologic charac
    tenzauon of the backfill material
    2) hydrologic characterization of
    backfill permeability 3) vertical
    unilormity of the spoils 4) lateral
    uniformm of the spoils and 5) the
    relationship ol backfill properties to
    the method of spoil placement The
    approach and intensity with which
    each of these areas is investigated
    will be determined bv the particular
    conditions found at each mine sue
    Geologic Chaiactemation
    Geologic ( haracterizat ion ol
    backlilled spoil has been sparse to
    date Geologic logs of drill cuttings
    [5-109
    GWMR'Winter 1983
    

    -------
    have been kept during drilling ol
    backfill wells at some sites These
    have not been particularly useful
    General homogeneity of the spoils
    has been seen, with no indication of
    discrete permeable zones This was
    fou nd to be the case even at t he Kenr-
    McGee sites where hydrologic test-
    ing Indicated high base-of-lift per-
    meability Cuttings samples may
    provldellthologlcInformation such
    as the presence of swelling clavs
    which reduce permeability however
    little information is gained regard
    ing particle size of the spoils
    Core samples may provide parli
    cle size data, however the informa-
    tion is still limited by the diameter
    of (he hole Examination of cores
    may yield insight Into verticalvana-
    t ion o r segrega t lo n of spoi Is bv 111 hol-
    ogy If water can be retained in i he-
    hole. geophysical logs mav be the
    best indicalor of permcabilnv
    changes
    Hydrologic Characterization
    Permeability of (he backlill aqui
    fer as a whole, or of a basal aquifer
    /one if present can be determined
    through the use of pump bail or
    slug tests This has alreadv been
    done at three of the sites in the
    Wyoming Powder River Basin Avalu-
    able tool which has not \et been
    employed ts repeat testing of these
    wells if the wells are drilled uith air
    then repeated aquifer testing over a
    period of several years mav indicate
    changes in permeability over time
    within the backfill aquifer If the
    wells are drilled with water or mud.
    repeated testing over a period of
    weeks or months may aid in well
    development and reflect changes in
    permeability- for this reason
    Vertical Continuity
    To date, backfill wells in the
    Wyoming Powder River Basin have
    been completed throughout the
    anticipated zone of saturation If
    geologic or hydrologic evidence indi-
    cates that the spoilsare not \ ertically
    homogeneous, it might be of interest
    to complete several wells at various
    depths within the spoil In this way.
    permeable zones above the floor of
    the pit can be investigated Well clus-
    ters also allow study ol the extent of
    vertical interconnection between
    permeable zones This relationship
    may affect the potential for recharge
    to the lower zone
    Lateral Continuity
    The lateral uniformirv ol spoils is
    also critical to a recharge analv sis If
    a permeable zone is continuous
    laterallv across the backlilled area
    then fairly rapid recharge from the
    unmincd coal or overburden would
    be expected If. on the other hand
    the zone Islimited ineMent httleor
    no recharge may occur despite the
    high permeability of the zone The
    lateral uniformity of spoils can be
    best examined by c omplct ing several
    wells m the spoil and comparing
    their geologic and hydrologic
    charac (eristics
    Mining Method
    Finally, a comparison of spoil
    characteristics \uih overburden
    lithologv and mining method ma\
    beinslrumental in predicting luturc
    bat kfill aquiler propcrt ics and learn-
    ing to 
    -------
    Section 5.2
    Solution Mining Wells Supporting Data
    [5-111]
    

    -------
    SECTION 5.2.1
    TITLE OF STUDY:	Letter to Mr. Mark Bell of the
    (OR SOURCE OF INFORMATION) Colorado Department of Health,
    Denver, RE Underground Injection
    Control permit requirements
    AUTHOR:	Edward C. Rosar, President,
    (OR INVESTIGATOR)	Industrial Resources, Inc.
    DATE:	April 14, 19 83
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION: A single well bulk sampling test
    in NE-1/4 of Section 27, T1S,
    R98W, Rio Blanco County,
    Colorado, USEPA Region VIII
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:	Nahcolite Solution Mining
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES: The proposed mining plan involves a "Class
    III" well to: 1) demonstrate the feasibility of solution mining
    techniques for extraction of nahcolite; 2) optimize the mining
    process; and 3) evaluate product characteristics. The project:
    will occur over a 6-month period in late 1983 and produce about
    250 tons of nahcolite. The solution mining technique will
    involve the injection of hot water into a saline zone (1795 co
    1826 feet below the surface) and dissolved nahcolite will be
    pumped to the surface. Processing will include dewatering,
    drying, and crystallizing.
    The site is near the center of the Piceance Basin which is an
    asymmetrical trough filled with Eocene sediments. The Parachute
    Creek member of the Green River Formation has an upper and lower
    aquifer, which are the only potential USDW beneath the site. The
    lower aquifer has been extensively leached where nahcolite has
    been dissolved from the formation. The injection zone lies about
    30 feet below the lower aquifer, and is separated from the
    aquifer by a zone of relatively competent, unleached marlstones.
    Within these marlstones are three highly plastic, impermeable
    kerogen zones.
    The proposed monitoring program encompasses three elements: 1)
    well construction that ensures no migration of injection fluid
    through the well-bore; 2) calculation of fluid balance during
    injection and recovery; and 3) installation and sampling of a
    monitoring well. Water samples will be analyzed for TDS, sodium,
    potassium, calcium, magnesium, carbonate, bicarbonate, chloride,
    and sulfate. After completion of the monitoring program, each
    well will be equipped with a locking steel surface cap. No
    plugging and sealing is planned so that wells can be used for
    future monitoring if necessary.
    [5-112]
    

    -------
    Industrial Resources. Inc.
    HwiTr
    *O0 L'fctu* Ifa't 1 r* Attn
    Lakewood Coiudral»o 80228
    T»	,10 l r»iM^4!i07
    ]4 April 1933
    Hr. Mark Bell
    Colorado Water Ouality Control Division
    Colorado Department of Health
    4210 East 11th Avenue
    Denver, CO 80220
    RE: Underground Injection Control (UIC) permit requirements.
    Dear Hr. Bel 1:
    Industrial Resources Inc. (1R1) is proposing to develop a single well bulk
    sampling test to solution mine nahcolUe in the NE 1/4 of Section 27, T1S,
    R98* in Rio Blanco County, Colorado. From discussions with you (14 March
    1933 ) through our environmental consultant, Camp Dresser and HcKee (CD^.), it
    1s my understanding that the UIC program is not currently in place but that
    your agency requests an informational letter describing our process in
    relation to UIC retirements. This letter, therefore, serves to delineate
    critical components of the proposed injection program in terns of specific
    regulatory requirements. Information provided herein is designed to meet
    the requirements of 40 CFR 122 and 40 CFR 145, as amended. The proposed
    program is presented below in terms of the plan of operation, the existing
    hydrogeologic environment, and proposed monitoring plans.
    Plan of Operation
    The proposed mining plan involves a Class III veil for the solution mining
    of salts. It consists of a single well test to (1) demonstrate the
    feasibility of solution mining techniques for the extraction of nahcolite,
    (2) optimize the mining process, and (3) evaluate product characteristics.
    The single well test will be conducted over approximately a six-month period
    during the sumer and fall of 19B3, with a total production of approximately
    250 tons of nahcolite.
    Drilling of the production well 1s scheduled to conmence in mid-Hay 1953.
    The well will be drilled to an Initial depth of approximately 1,795 feet.
    (Geologic and geophysical logging will be accomplished following drilling
    activities.) This section will be fully cased with a nominal 6-inch
    diameter steel casing. Surface casing of approximately a 10-inch diameter
    will also be installed. The annular space between the well bore and casing
    will be sealed to adeouately isolate the injection zone from the lower
    aquifer, and the lower aquifer from the upper aquifer, (reference geoloaic
    description below) with a cement or grout/bentonite slurry. Additionally,
    150 feet of steel surface caslnq will be sealed in place to preclude
    Introduction of surface runoff. Once the annular seal has been established
    [5-113]
    

    -------
    Page 2
    14 April 1983
    Hr. Hark Bell
    and verified by bond logging, an open hole Injection zone will be drilled to
    e depth of 1,B?5 feet. Total surflclal disturbance associated with
    production drilling activities will consist of an area approximately 50 feet
    by 75 feet 1n size.
    Nahcolite will be extracted using solution mining techniques. Hot water
    will be injected into the saline zone (1.79S to 1,826 feet below qroundl and
    the dissolved nahcolite will be pumped to the surface. The pregnant
    solution will be pumped from the injection well through pipes to a surface
    bulk sampling plant. Processing Includes dewaterlng, drying, and
    crystallizing.
    Additional ancillary surface facilities will include a portable power
    generator, topsoil stockpile, a pit (plastic-lined) to hold water for
    drilling purposes, and access road(s). Details of the surface facilities
    and associated activities are provided in the Litrited Impact Permit, on file
    with the Colorado Hined land Reclamation Division (CKi.R0).
    Existing HydrDgeologic Environnent
    The site is situated near the center of the Piceance Basin, an asymetrical
    trough filled with thick seouences of Eocene age deposits (see attached
    Figures 1 and 2). The dominant geologic units are the Uinta and Green River
    Formations. The younger Uinta Formation comprises the exDOsed surficial
    strata, largely silty sandstone and siltstone, with interbedded marlstone.
    The unit Is approximately 1,000 feet thick on this site. The Green River
    Formation underlies the Unita Formation, and has a total thickness of
    greater than 3,000 feet. The Green River Formation Is divided into three
    principal sub-units. In descending order, these are the Parachute Creek,
    Garden Gulch, and Douqlas Creek members. The latter two members are
    characterized by largely Impermeable shales and clayey siltstone, and
    generally comprise the lower confining zone for the ore body.
    The Parachute Creek member Is typically divided into upper and lower zones,
    with the kerogen-rich Mahogany Zone comprising a semi-permeable to
    inpenneable intervening layer. Similarly, the occurrence of ground water
    within the Pa/achute Creek member is divided into upper and lower aquifers.
    The upper aauifer Includes fractured marl stones of the upper Parachute Creek
    member as well as fractured sandstones of the overlyinq Uinta Formation.
    The lower aquifer consists of marlstones which have been extensively
    leached, where nahcolite has been dissolved from the formation. This Is
    consequently referred to as the leach zone. These aquifers are the only
    potential Underground Sources of Drinking Water (USDW) beneath the site.
    The zone of injection, regionally referred to as the saline zone, underlies
    the lower aquifer. The saline zone itself is uniformally a nahcolite-
    bearing marlstone and is relatively impermeable. It is not, and cannot be,
    considered a USDW. This mineralized zone occurs at a depth of approximately
    1 ,792 feet, and is separated from the lower aquifer by nearly 30 feet of
    relatively competent, unleached marl stones. Within these marlstones are
    [5-114]
    

    -------
    Page 3
    14 April 1983
    Mr. Mark Bell
    three highly plastic kerogen zones referred to as the "rubber beds" whereas
    Garden Gulch and Douglas Creek strata form an Impermeable lower boundary to
    the saline zone. The rubber beds provide hydraulic Isolation above the
    saline zone to the lower aquifer.
    1R1 1s utilizing a 1/4-mile radius to encompass the area of review.
    However, data available from both Inside and outside this area have been
    utilized for the characterization of the existing environment. A ground
    water use Inventory Indicates that no ground water wells have been Installed
    within a one-mile radius of the proposed injection site. Additionally,
    ground water use from the lower acuifer Is sparse, owing largely to high
    levels of Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) in the aquifer. TDS concentrations
    are uniformly in excess of 1000 mg/1, and often range as high as 40,000
    mg/1 as reported in the Final Supdenental Environmental Impact Statement
    for the Prototype Oil Shale Leasing Program (Bureau of Land Management
    1983.)
    Proposed Homtoring Plans
    1RI proposes a monitoring plan that encompasses three components:
    (1)	Well construction that ensures no migration of Injection fluid
    through the well bore,
    (2)	Calculation of a fluid balance during injection and recovery, and
    (3)	Installation and sampling of a monitoring well.
    The production well will be fully cased throuqh the lower aquifer and
    through the Intervening impermeable kerogen beds. Therefore, no loss of
    fluid Is anticipated through the well itself. Furthermore, the annulus will
    be sealed to prevent upward migration from the injection zone into the lower
    aquifer in the well bore.
    Any potential excursion of Injection water or saline-pregnant recovery fluid
    will be detected from deficits In the water balance. As noted previously,
    no migration is anticipated due to the Impermeable character of the
    Injection zone and overlyinq strata.
    1RI will Install b monitor well to provide an extra measure of security.
    Data from existing wells in the area have been utilized to calculate the
    flow direction (N 34° E) and approximate natural flow velocity (0.01 ft/day)
    of the lower aquifer. These data allow selection of an optimal location
    (down-gradient) for Installation of the monitoring well.
    The monitor well will be initially drilled to a depth of 1,300 feet at the
    top of the lower aquifer. This section will* be cased for the full length
    with 4-1nch diameter steel casing, and the annular space sealed across the
    Mahogany Zone as with the production well. An open hole completion interval
    [5-115]
    

    -------
    Paoe 4
    11 April 1983
    Mr. Mark Bell
    will then be drilled to a total depth of 1,765 feet below ground surface.
    The monitor well will be situated approximately 50 feet from the production
    well and will disturb an area of approximately SO feet by 75 feet.
    Water samples will be collected three times from the monitor well. These
    are prior at operation, during operation, and approximately one month after
    operation. Samples will be analyzed for the following consituents:
    These parameters were selected to provide both an adequate representation of
    existing conditions and an Indication if any fluid aigration is occurring.
    Veil Abandonment
    Subsequent to completion of the monitoring progran, each well will be
    equipped with a locking steel surface cap. The cap will Insure that foreign
    material (including surface runoff) will not be introduced into the cased or
    completion interval. No plugging or sealinq of the wells is currently
    planned so that the wells can be used for future Bonitorlng purposes if
    necessary.
    1 trust that the information provided in this letter will serve the needs of
    your agency. IRI will be happy to work with the Water Quality Control
    Division on this test program as with any future injection programs.
    If you have any questions, please call.
    (Iu
    Edward C. Rosar
    President
    ER/db
    cc: Paul Osborn, EPA-Denver
    M. Jones, Cliffs Engineering
    E. Hinzei, COM
    Total Dissolved Solids (TDS1
    Sodium
    Potassuim
    Calcium
    Magnesium
    Carbonate
    Bicarbonate
    Chloride
    Sulfate
    ?-4
    [5-115]
    

    -------
    SECTION 5.2.2
    TITLE OF STUDY:	Assessment of Class V Injection
    (OR SOURCE OF INFORMATION) Wells in the State of Wyoming
    AUTHOR:	Western Water Companies
    (OR INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:	September 19 86
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION: Wyoming, USEPA Region VIII
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:	NA
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES: Solution mining wells in Wyoming are
    associated with stopes leaching of conventional uranium mines at
    two facilities in Converse County. Available inventory indicates
    there are 14 active wells of this type. Wells are completed into
    mined areas and total depths vary. PVC or steel casing is used
    and perforated opposite stopes. The annulus is generally
    cemented from the packer above the stop to land surface.
    Lixiviants used include acids (hydrochloric, sulfuric, acetic),
    oxidizers (hydrogen peroxide, ozone, chlorine, oxygen), bases
    (sodium carbonate), and ion exchange agents (ammonia, ammonium
    chloride, alkalai metal salts). Hazards to groundwater from such
    activity include increases in TDS, sulfates, and nitrates or
    extreme pH fluctuations. Other contaminants are radium,
    vanadium, thorium, and uranium. Experimental technology wells
    are found in areas where uranium ore is found in saturated
    aquifers at shallow to moderate depths. Sixteen facilities,
    operating more than 119 wells, have been inventoried. PVC or
    steel casing, perforated opposite the ore body and cemented from
    the packer (set in clay or shale above the ore body) to land
    surface is common. Lixiviants used are generally identical to
    those used in conventional solution mining. Hazards to
    groundwater are also generally the same.
    Experimental technology wells used for in situ Trona recovery are
    found in the Central Green River Basin (Sweetwater County), and
    three facilities, using 16 wells, have been inventoried. Total
    depths range from 1500 to 2000 feet in this area, a steel casing
    is extended into or through trona beds. Perforation in the
    casing are opposite the trona beds, and casing is usually
    cemented from the top of the highest minable trona bed to the
    land surface. Occasionally the casing is cemented between trona
    beds. Lixiviants are of proprietary composition, and mobilize
    sodium, chloride, and carbonate species. Hazard potential to
    groundwater is deemed minimal with proper well construction in
    that trona deposits are vertically and hydraulically isolated
    from drinking water aquifers.
    [5-117]
    

    -------
    Solution Mining Wells
    Class V injection wells in Wyoming that fall into this category are
    associated with stopes leaching of conventional uranium mines at two
    facilities in Converse County. Potential application of this type of
    well would probably be limited to areas having either uranium or trona
    resources, as outlined on Figure 3-1, with the unlikely addition of
    certain metal-bearing mineralized areas in the Precambrian cores of
    Wyoming's mountain ranges. At present, only 14 stopes leaching wells
    exist in Wyoming according to available inventory data (WDEQ, 1985a).
    Construction techniques for the existing solution mining wells are
    very similar to those used for uranium in situ leaching wells, as are
    the injected fluids and injection horizons. Consequently, solution
    mining wells received a hazard ranking that was the second highest of
    the ranked well types.
    53
    [5-113]
    

    -------
    SOLUTION MINING WELLS - STOPES LEACHING IN CONVENTIONAL URANIUM MINES
    Number of Facilities:
    Number of Wells: 14
    Locations:
    Well Construction:
    Injection Horizon:
    Injected Materials:
    Hazards:
    Limited to existing underground uranium or
    other mineral mines; Converse and Fremont
    Counties (see Figure 3-1)
    Wells are completed into mined areas;
    total depths are variable; PVC or steel
    casing generally installed to total depth
    and perforated opposite stopes; annulus
    cemented from packer above stope to land
    surface
    Into, above or below sensitive aquifers
    Lixiviants: acids such as hydrochloric,
    sulfuric, or acetic; oxidizers such as
    hydrogen peroxide, ozone, chlorine, or
    oxygen; bases such as sodium carbonate;
    ion exchange agents such as ammonia,
    ammonium chloride, or alkali metal salts
    Water can become unfit for use due to
    increased concentrations of TDS, sulfates,
    nitrates, or extreme pH. Restoration of
    aquifer to background water quality often
    difficult. Contaminants such as radium
    thorium, vanadium and uranium may be
    released into strata above or below ore
    body
    54
    [5-119]
    

    -------
    EXPERIMENTAL TECHNOLOGY WELLS - URANIUM IN SITU LEACHING
    Number of Facilities: 16
    Number of Wells: more than 119
    Locations:
    Well Construction:
    Injection Horizon:
    Injected Materials:
    Areas of the State where uranium ore is
    found in saturated aquifers at shallow to
    moderate depths (see Figure 3-1)
    Shallow to moderate total depth; PVC or
    steel casing perforated opposite ore body
    in permeable sandstone; packer set
    opposite clay or shale above ore body;
    annul us cemented from packer to land
    surface
    Below, into or above sensitive aquifers
    Lixiviants: commonly acids such as
    hydrochloric, sulfuric, or acetic; oxiders
    such as hydrogen peroxide, ozone,
    chlorine, or oxygen; bases such as sodium
    carbonate; ion exchange agents such as
    ammonia, ammonium chloride, or alkali
    metal salts. Leaching also mobilizes
    toxic contaminants such as-uranium,
    thorium, radium, vanadium, arsenic, and
    selenium
    Hazards:	Water can become unfit for use due to
    increased concentrations of TDS, sulfates,
    nitrates, or extreme pH. Restoration of
    aquifer to background water quality often
    difficult. Contaminants are often
    released into strata above or below ore
    body
    49
    [5-120]
    

    -------
    EXPERIMENTAL TECHNOLOGY WELLS - IN SITU TRONA RECOVERY
    Number of Facilities: 3
    Number of Wells: 16
    Locations:	Central Green River Basin, Sweetwater
    County (see Figure 3-1)
    Well Construction:	Total depths (in Wyoming) 1,500 ft to
    2,000 ft; steel casing extending into or
    through trona beds to be mined;
    perforations opposite trona beds; annul us
    cemented from top of highest minable trona
    bed to surface and occasionally between
    minable beds also
    Injection Horizon:	Below sensitive aquifers
    Injected Materials: Lixiviants of proprietary composition,
    water. Solution mobilizes sodium,
    chloride, and carbonate species (trona and
    associated minerals)
    Hazards:	Water might become unfit for use due to
    increased concentrations of TOS, sodium or
    chloride, or extreme pH. Small hazard
    potential with proper well completion
    because trona deposits are vertically and
    hydraulically isolated from aquifers with
    Class I-III water
    50
    [3-121]
    

    -------
    SECTION 5.2.3
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (OR SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    "Chapter 7: In Situ Uranium
    Leaching," Assessment of Class V
    Injection Wells in the State of
    Wyoming
    AUTHOR:
    (OR INVESTIGATOR)
    Western Water Companies
    DATE:
    September 1986
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION: Wyoming, USEPA Region VIII
    NATURE OF BUSINESS
    NA
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES: This technology has been used in Wyoming
    since the early 1970's. The in situ method involves: 1)
    injection of a lixiviant (barren solution) into a uranium-bearing
    ore body via injection wells; 2) mobilization of uranium by che
    creation of a soluble complex salt; 3) recovery of the uranium-
    bearing lixiviant (pregnant solution); 4) recovery of uranium
    from the pregnant solution using ion exchange techniques; and 5)
    restoration of the groundwater to a prescribed post-mining
    quality.
    In situ projects fall into two categories: 1) Those using
    production wells to recover pregnant solution from a subsurface
    ore body which has not been previously mined; and 2) those which
    recover pregnant solution from ore bodies via pre-existing
    underground mine workings. Selection of lixiviants is based on
    several factors, including geologic setting, mineral and chemical
    constituency of the host rock, hydrology, previous experience
    with and knowledge of lixiviants, and the potential profitability
    of various leaching systems. The three principal types of
    lixiviants are sulfuric acid, ammonium carbonate, and sodium
    carbonate/bicarbonate. The use of sulfuric acid and ammonium
    solutions is no longer permitted by the Wyoming DEQ because they
    have created complex problems with groundwater restoration.
    The following projects, located in the Powder River Basin, are
    assessed in this report:
    1.	Collins Draw Project (Cleveland Cliffs Iron Co.) which
    utilized ammonium carbonate lixiviant;
    2.	Reno Ranch Project (Rocky Mounting Energy Co.)- where
    sulfuric acid and sodium carbonate lixiviants were used; and
    3.	Bill Smith Stopes Leaching Project (Kerr-McGee Nuclear
    Corp.) in which sodium bicarbonate lixiviant was injected
    into ore above underground mine workings.
    [5-122]
    

    -------
    CHAPTER 7
    IN SITU URANIUM LEACHING
    Introduction
    The goal of this chapter is to evaluate the degree of hazard and
    the severity of existing and potential impacts to the ground water
    caused by experimental in situ uranium mining in Wyoming. The
    assessments will be based upon available site-specific data.
    In situ mining, also called in situ leaching or solution mining, ->s
    a relatively new addition to the list of mining methods currently used
    to extract uranium in Wyoming. The technology has been in use to
    recover uranium in Wyoming for 14 years. Basically, the in situ
    method involves: 1) the injection of a lixiviant (an acidic or basic
    oxidizing solution, the so-called barren solution) into a
    uranium-bearing ore body via injection wells; 2) mobilization of the
    uranium from the host material by the lixiviant via creation of a
    soluble complex salt; 3) recovery of the uranium-bearing lixiviant
    (called pregnant solution); 4) recovery of uranium from the pregnant
    solution using ion exchange techniques (Vandell, undated); and 5)
    restoration of the ground water to a prescribed post-mining quality.
    In situ uranium leaching projects fall into two categories: 1)
    those which use production wells to recover lixiviants from a subsurface
    ore body which has not previously been mined; and 2) those which recover
    lixiviants from ore bodies via pre-existing underground mine workings.
    In the latter case, the pregnant solution drains into the mine workings
    142
    [5-123]
    

    -------
    through longholes or directly through the formation, and is then pumped
    to the surface for uranium recovery. A variety of lixiviants may be
    employed to leach uranium and some experiments may use more than one
    kind of lixiviant. In Wyoming, the selection of lixiviants has been
    made by the industrial company responsible for conducting an experiment.
    Selections have been based on factors including geologic setting,
    mineral and chemical constituency of the host rock, hydrology, previous
    experience with and knowledge of lixiviants, and the potential
    profitability of various leaching systems.
    The three principal lixiviant types used in subsurface in situ
    uranium mining have been: 1) sulfuric acid, 2) ammonium carbonate, and
    3) sodium carbonate/bicarbonate. With each type, an oxidizing chemical
    such as hydrogen peroxide or oxygen may be added to the lixiviant in
    addition to the principal chemical. The use of sulfuric acid or
    ammonium solutions as lixiviants is no longer permitted by WDEQ because
    these lixiviants have created complex problems with ground-water
    restoration in Wyoming.
    The following projects are assessed in this report:
    1.	The Collins Draw Project, operated by Cleveland Cliffs Iron
    Company, which utilized ammonium carbonate lixiviant; ana
    2.	The Reno Ranch project, operated by Rocky Mountain Energy
    Company, where sulfuric acid and sodium carbonate lixiviants
    were used;
    3.	The Bill Smith Stopes Leaching Project, operated by the
    Kerr-McGee Nuclear Corporation, in which sodium bicarbonate
    lixiviant was injected into ore above "underground mine
    workings.
    143
    [5-124]
    

    -------
    All of these projects were located in the Powder River Basin of
    Wyoming.
    Regional Hydrogeology
    The Collins Draw, Reno Ranch, and Bill Smith Projects were located
    in the southern half of the Powder River Basin (see Figure 7-1). The
    Powder River Basin covers approximately 12,000 square miles and is a
    structural and topographic basin bounded on the east by the Black Hills
    and on the west by the Big Horn Mountains. As much as 18,000 ft of
    sedimentary rock are present in the deepest part of the basin (Hodson
    and others, 1973). The Eocene Wasatch and Fort Union Formations crop
    out in the basin and both contain mineable uranium deposits.
    The Wasatch Formation is approximately 1,600 ft thick in the
    Pumpkin Buttes area (NRC, 1978); it consists of alternating sandstones,
    siltstones, claystones and coal beds.
    Approximately 3,500 ft of the Paleocene Fort Union Formation
    underlie the Wasatch Formation. The Fort Union Formation is composed of
    interbedded fine- to coarse-grained sandstone, siltstone, claystone,
    lignite, and coal. The portion of the Fort Union Formation which is the
    host unit for the uranium ores is locally referred to as the Highland
    Sandstone. The Highland Sandstone is relatively consistent laterally
    and underlies a large area in the southern portion of the basin.
    The uranium ore deposits in the Powder River basin which have been
    solution mined are generally at depths ranging from 100 to 500 feet. A
    plan view and cross sections of typical uranium roll front and uranium
    144
    [5-125]
    

    -------
    MONTANA
    N
    i
    sherioan jz	i • 3&I	v
    CROOK
    project
    
    T^7f WESTON
    Colhg5 Dr
    
    Project
    NATRONA
    NIOBRARA
    DOUGLAS
    
    CASPER
    ARCH
    CASPERO ;
    LARAMIE) RANGE
    Explanation for Tertiary Section
    \ V.. -1 WASATCH FORMATION,
    SHOWING LOCATION Of
    sanostonc pacics
    WASATCH FORMATION
    3HOWIN4 LOCATION Of
    CLATSTONC/SILTSTONC
    FACICS
    WASATCH FORMATION,
    3HOWIN« LOCATION Of
    CONauOtCRATCS
    I FOITT UNION
    FORMATION
    contact arrwccN hock units
    SYNCLINC, STRUCTURAL AXIS
    OF FQWQC* HIVCN SASIN
    ~
    »R€-TCWTIARY NOCKS
    lO 20 30 «0 SO mile*
    T"
    20
    40
    H
    «0 to km
    Figure 7-1. Regional Geology of the Powder River Basin, Wyoming,
    Showing Locations of Assessed Uranium In Situ Leaching
    Projects (modified after Sharp and Gibbon, 1954).
    145
    [5-12S]
    

    -------
    ore deposits are shown in Figure 7-2. Cross Section B of Figure 7-2
    illustrates a typical injection-recovery well system and the generalized
    ground-water flow directions during mining.
    Hodson and others (1973) present a description of the
    hydrostratigraphic units of the Powder River Basin. The following
    discussion is derived from that description.
    Generally, the hydrostratigraphy of the Wasatch Formation consists
    of sandstone aquifers confined by siltstone and claystone aquitards.
    Shallow water-table (unconfined) aquifers may also be present; they are
    of limited areal extent and occur mainly along the more prominent water-
    courses. Wells in the confined sandstone aquifers may yield several
    hundred gallons per minute. Jointed coal beds also produce water in
    some areas, but they yield much less water than the sandstone aquifers.
    Total dissolved solids range from less than 200 to more than 8,000 mg/L
    but are commonly 500 to 1,500 mg/L (NRC, 1978). The water generally
    ranges from a sodium bicarbonate to a sodium sulfate type.
    Ground-water movement in the Wasatch Formation generally is to the
    north toward the Powder River and its tributaries. In shallow aquifers,
    ground water movement may be influenced locally by other drainages that
    act as discharge areas. The regional hydraulic gradient, derived from
    water-level data from 91 wells, was reported as .006 and the
    ground-water flow rate was estimated to be about 6.3 ft/yr in the
    central part of the basin (In Situ Consulting, Inc., 1978).
    Ground water in the Powder River Basin is primarily used for
    livestock watering and domestic water supply. Some shallow alluvial
    wells, yielding between a few gpm and 1,000 gpm, are located on the
    146
    [5-127]
    

    -------
    OXYGENATED WATER
    ma FRONT Oft CHEMICAL FRONT
    (INTERFACE 8CTWEEN OXYGENATED
    WATER ANO REDUCING ENVIRONMENT)
    REDUC3NG
    ENVIRONMENT
    INJECTION _	RECCVERy wtu.
    WELL ~)1	^*1	/P INjecTl0N *6U.
    ^	11	<>	GROUND LEVEL
    )&%$&£&&&j0m&.
    ?5hflLE"wMuOSTONE2g55
    <2^(IMPERMEABLE LAYER).
    SANOSTONE AQUIFER
    Shale 0« MUOSTONE -?>
    (IMPERMEABLE layer
    Figure 7-2. Cross Sections of a Typical Uranium Roll Front Deposit
    and the Solution Mining Unit (from Vandell, undated).
    147
    [5-128]
    

    -------
    floodplain of the Powder River. However, ground water from the alluvial
    aquifers is generally of poorer quality than ground water from deeper
    aquifers in the Wasatch and Fort Union Formations. Ground waters from
    these two formations have generally good quality, although they may be
    high in TDS, and are frequently defined as calcium or sodium
    bicarbonate, or sodium sulfate types. Ground water in the uranium ore
    zone of the Wasatch Formation may be as high as 8,000 mg/L TDS and
    ground water in the ore zone of the Fort Union Formation may be as high
    as 2,000 mg/L TDS. Wells in the Wasatch Formation yield from 10 to 500
    gpm and wells in the Fort Union Formation yield a maximum of around 150
    gpm.
    Ground Water Impacts at Uranium Solution Mines
    Two general types of ground-water pollution problems can occur
    during and following uranium solution mining activities. These problems
    are lixiviant excursions and failure of ground-water restoration.
    An excursion is the movement of lixiviant, either vertically or
    horizontally, away from the intended mining zone. An excursion can
    affect water quality in the ore zone outside the mining area and in
    aquifers above or below the ore zone, either within or adjacent to the
    mining area. Excursions are initially characterized by increased
    concentrations of dissolved solids or conductivity in ground-water. If
    the excursion is not controlled, elevated uranium and other trace
    element concentrations will also ultimately be detectable in the
    excursion zone.
    148
    [5-129]
    

    -------
    Lateral and vertical excursions have occurred at uranium in situ
    leach sites in Wyoming Powder River Basin as a result of uncontrolled
    movement of lixiviant out of damaged well casings, through improperly
    plugged exploration drill holes, and through leaky aquitards.
    Excursions have also resulted from inadequate balancing of the rates of
    lixiviant injection and withdrawal at a multiple-well installation
    (commonly called a well field or cell). Properly balancing injection
    and withdrawal becomes more difficult as an ore body becomes more
    hetereogeneous.
    Cracked well casings are generally the result of faulty well
    construction and development. Faulty well construction practices
    include the use of improper underreaming tools; improper sealing above
    and below screened, perforated, or open casing intervals; and flaws in
    casing joints or the use of improper casing materials (i.e., using PVC
    when fiberglass or steel casing should be used).
    Improperly abandoned drill holes can serve as major channels for
    lixiviant migration into surrounding aquifers. If excursions result in
    contamination of aquifers of good water quality, costly clean-up
    programs must be implemented to return the affected ground waters to
    their potential or existing pre-mining water uses.
    If confining units which surround an ore zone are vertically or
    laterally discontinuous, or are not thick 210.131, j-	. s »
    permeability (especially vertical permeability) is not uniformly lev
    enough to prevent excursions, then in situ mining at a site should not
    be considered.
    149
    [5-130]
    

    -------
    Following solution mining of an ore body, the remaining ground
    water must be restored to its pre-mining quality and/or use
    classification. This may be accomplished by a variety of techniques,
    some of which are similar to the mining process. The techniques include
    1) withdrawal, treatment at the surface to remove contaminants, and
    reinjection of the treated ground water into the contaminated area to
    flush the aquifer; 2) ground-water sweeping using native ground water to
    flush the contaminated area through the existing leaching injection
    and recovery wells; 3) chemical precipitation; 4) biological
    nitrification; and 5) natural restoration. Natural restoration combined
    with surface treatment and reinjection of in situ ground waters
    generally results in effective restoration. The number of pore volumes
    of water required for restoration has been reported by Kohler (1984) as
    between 3 and 30, with the high degree of variability resulting from
    varied site conditions.
    Failure of restoration, when it has occurred, has generally
    resulted from incompatibilities between the mining process and the
    aquifer being mined; inadequate efforts on the part of the mine
    operator; or a combination of these factors. Specific examples are
    presented in the following chapters.
    The impact of restoration failure or uncontrolled excursions is the
    degradation of ground-water quality from baseline levels. This
    degradation can affect the ore zone and aquifers above or below the ore
    zone, within the mining area as well as adjacent to it. Following
    abandonment of restoration efforts, contaminated ground water will
    migrate away from the mining area under the influence of natural
    150
    [5-131]
    

    -------
    hydraulic gradients, carrying the contaminants varying distances from
    the mining area. Increased concentrations of uranium, radium,
    selenium, arsenic, or vanadium could preclude the use of affected ground
    water for domestic, stock, irrigation, municipal, or industrial
    purposes. High concentrations of these constituents in drinking water
    are hazardous to the health of animals and humans.
    The potential for severe contamination of ground waters at uranium
    in situ leach mine sites can be minimized by:
    1.	Obtaining a thorough understanding of the hydrogeology at the
    site, especially with respect to the proposed mine plan and
    lixiviant movement in the ore zone aquifer and potentially to
    the surrounding aquifers and confining beds;
    2.	Properly plugging all abandoned exploration drill holes or
    abandoned wells within the hydrogeologic area that will be
    affected by mining; and
    3.	Testing well casing integrity before injection and recovery
    wells are placed into operation. If flaws cannot be located
    or corrected, then inadequate wells must be properly
    abandoned, and replaced as necessary.
    151
    [5-132]
    

    -------
    CHAPTER 7A
    COLLINS DRAW PROJECT - CLEVELAND CLIFFS IRON COMPANY
    Introduction
    The Cleveland Cliffs Iron Company's (CCIC) Collins Draw Project was
    selected for one of three in situ uranium leaching assessments because:
    1) it made use of ammonium carbonate/bicarbonate as lixiviant; and 2)
    the quality and quantity of data available were adequate for the
    assessment.
    The Collins Draw Project site is located southwest of the Pumpkin Buttes
    in the central Powder River Basin, in parts of sections 35 and 36,
    T.43N., R.76W., Campbell County, about 60 miles southwest of Gillette,
    Wyoming.
    Site Hydroqeoloqy
    Uranium mineralization at the Collins Draw site occurs as
    roll-front deposits in a sandstone bed of the Wasatch Formation. The
    ore sandstone is designated the 1-Sand by CCIC. The 1-Sand is present
    at a depth of about 425 ft; it has an average thickness of about 50 to
    55 ft (CCIC, 1981). Figure 7A-1 presents a generalized stratigraphic
    section for the mine site. The sandstone units at Collins Draw are
    separated by silty claystone units. The units identified by CCIC are
    depicted in cross section on Figure 7A-1.
    The 1-Sand was divided into three different layers in a hydrologic
    evaluation of the site conducted by In Situ Consulting, Inc. (1978).
    152
    [5-
    

    -------
    
    o
    £
    Ground
    Surfact
    
    Xyr-XyX-Xv
    US]
    Surficial Claystone and Sandstone
    Thickness up to 15 m (50 ft)
    C Sandstone
    Thickness less than 30m (100 ft)
    Claystone
    Thickness 8 to 13m (26 to 41 ft)
    A8 Sandstone
    Average thickness about 67 m (220 ft)
    A Sandstone separated from 0 Sandstone by
    daystones in some locations
    Upper Confining Claystone
    Thickness 3 to 16m (II to 52ft)
    I Sandstone
    Average thickness about 16m (52 ft)
    Uranium-bearing unit
    Lower Confining Claystone Thickness 3 to 5m (10 to 16 ft)
    Stray Sandstone
    Thickness less than 4 m (12 ft)
    Limited extent
    Figure 7A-1. Generalized Stratigraphic Section for the Collins Ira1,.-
    Project Area (after Cleveland Cliffs Iron Company, 1981a).
    153
    [5-134]
    

    -------
    The upper 15 ft and lower 15 ft of the sand unit were observed to be
    less clayey than the 20 to 25 ft interior portion; the interior portion
    has lower porosity and hydraulic conductivity than the upper and lower
    portions of the unit.
    Three major-water bearing sandstone units (the 1, AB, and C sands)
    are present at the Collins Draw mine site; however, available
    information pertains only to local ground water conditions in the
    1-Sand. The 1-Sand is a confined aquifer; the unit is present between
    elevations 4,400 and 4,470 feet, and its potentiometric surface lies
    between 4,790 and 4,815 feet above sea level. (Figures 7A-2 and 7A-3).
    The direction of ground-water flow direction is 19° west of north under
    a local gradient of about .008 (In Situ Consulting, Inc., 1978).
    Water-level fluctuations observed over a one and one-half year period
    were on the order of a few inches.
    In Situ Consulting, Inc. reported that the 1-Sand aquifer averages
    52 ft in thickness with a porosity of .28, average storage coefficient
    -4	2
    of 1.7x10 and average transmissivity of about 26 ft /day. Horizontal
    hydraulic conductivity of this aquifer was estimated to be on the order
    of 0.3 to 0.6 ft/day. Standard hydraulic conductivity is 0.48 ft/day.
    The direction of major transmissivity was determined to be E31°S (In
    Situ Consulting Inc., 1978).
    Ground Water Quality
    CCIC conducted a baseline water-quality sampling program in 1978.
    Thirteen wells were sampled an average of four times each; 11 of these
    wells were completed in the ore-bearing sandstone aquifer. Wells were
    154
    [5-135]
    

    -------
    IT*	*4
    A 23»w(MN»
    m mm
    14 4 0m ¦
    I4J0«-
    1400 m ~
    I )t0i> -
    IJ40"> ¦
    I SANO
    CI ION
    IU4MA
    (4.X t, t ,t.
    
    
    imfm
    C SANO
    i'ifn /II
    
    AS SAND
    
    — 4roon
    B
    - 4eoon
    — 4600 II
    -4JOO II
    (MN3r
    2}9W
    B'*
    Wtll Field
    I39W
    Well Field
    (nol lo tcole)
    M^.r4"00"	| | Sandstone
    0	30	100 ll
    	1	'	'	«	1 m
    O 10 20 JO "*
    [M/A
    BsSgj Claystone
    Figure 7A-2. Cross section through the Collins Draw mine area (after Cleveland Cliffs Iron Company, 1981).
    w
    i
    w
    o>
    

    -------
    '°0.
    °Oo,
    '•'On
    
    '¦"a
    •°ofl
    rfu
    ^ Or
    
    °0.
    "0
    
    r"r
    
    
    
    
    
    !,<°n
    
    "o,
    
    •Oooi
    •°°0
    re ^
    o*«,
    ^7/,e ^ ?0^er„.
    J'fe /r'e c„
    [Sface c,
    " s'l
    0r>5u;°? at t.
    ¦°Oq
    d*.
    dty
    ^56
    fs~
    I3?j
    

    -------
    also completed in the overlying and underlying aquifers. Table 7A-1
    presents the average concentrations of various dissolved constituents
    for each aquifer. Total dissolved solids concentrations averaged about
    400 mg/L and ammonia (as N) averaged 0.11 in the ore-bearing sandstone
    aquifer. Water in all three aquifers meets the WDEQ/WQD Class I
    (domestic use) standard, with the exception of the Radium-226
    concentration in the ore-bearing sand, which averaged 16.2 pCi/L.
    Ground-Mater Use
    Seven ground-water appropriation well permits are found within
    about 1.5 miles of the Collins Draw lease boundaries (Figure 7A-4). All
    wells are used for stock purposes except one which CCIC uses for
    ground-water monitoring (Table 7A-2). Two wells have sufficient
    artesian pressure to flow at the land surface at rates of 1 to 5 gpm
    (Wyoming State Engineer, various). A number of the wells were drilled
    to depths which indicate that the wells may produce water from the
    experiment-mining aquifer.
    Description of Facilities
    The permit area for the CCIC experiment site consist of 42.4 acres
    in sections 35 and 36, T.43N., R.76W., as shown on Figure 7A-5. Figure
    7A-6 shows the facilities at the Collins Draw mine area (Permit 3 RD).
    The A-l well field covers approximately 1/4 acre and consists of 12
    wells spaced about 20 ft apart arranged in a "staggered line drive"
    157
    [5-138]
    

    -------
    Table 7A-1. Average baseline concentrations for the A8-Sand.
    1-Sand» and Stray Sand aquifers at tfie Collins
    Oraw mine (modified after U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
    Commission, 1963 ).
    Parameter
    mg/l
    AB-Sand
    1-Sand
    Stray Sand
    TDS (calculated)
    TDS (105°C)
    Conductivity 77°F (Lab)
    (pmhos/an)
    Conductivity 2S°C (Field)
    (pmhos/an)
    Sodium (calculated)
    Sodium (observed)
    Potassium
    Calclurn
    Magneslum
    Sulfate
    Chior1de
    Carbonate
    Bicarbonate
    pH (Lab) (units)
    pH (Field) (units)
    Ammonia as N
    Nitrate as N
    Nitrite as N
    Aluminum [.05]
    Arsenic C.01]
    Barium C.OS]
    Boron Cl-03
    Cadmium [.002]
    Chromium C.013
    Copper [.01]
    F1uor!de
    Iron [.01]
    Lead
    Manganese [.01]
    Mercury [.001]
    Selenium [.01]
    Nickel [.04]
    Zinc [.01]
    Molybdenum [.OS]
    Vanadium [.05]
    Uranium [.001]
    Radfum-226 (gCl/L)
    Temperature C (Field)
    543
    544
    743
    1607
    143
    147
    7
    37
    5
    156
    93
    0
    207
    8.0
    7.5
    .33
    .02
    .09
    NO
    .024
    NO
    NO
    NO
    NO
    .01
    .13
    2.85
    NO
    .05
    NO
    .07
    NO
    .01
    NO
    NO
    .03
    4.4
    14.2
    394
    407
    621
    1245
    106
    10S
    7
    28
    2
    150
    19
    9
    ISO
    8.
    7.
    2
    6
    .11
    .14
    .04
    NO
    NO
    NO
    NO
    NO
    NO
    NO
    .17
    .24
    NO
    .02
    NO
    NO
    NO
    NO
    NO
    NO
    .09
    16.2
    14.1
    322
    323
    540
    967
    103
    90
    9
    12
    2
    68
    44
    28
    114
    8.8
    9.1
    0.2
    0.4
    0.2
    NO
    NO
    NO
    NO
    NO
    NO
    NO
    0.4
    0.1
    NO
    NO
    NO
    NO
    NO
    NO
    NO
    NO
    .02
    6.2
    15
    [ ] Detection limits.
    NO—Not detected.
    158
    [5-139]
    

    -------
    
    R. 76 W
    R. 75 W.
    T. 43 N.
    0II903
    27
    26
    25
    30
    ^11898
    
    34
    35
    ccrc
    LEASE
    BOUNDARY^
    J
    
    I2296#
    J/
    T.42 N.
    14646 ^
    J
    2
    ^ 14647
    #II890
    )
    53807#
    6
    
    
    
    
    1898
    EXPLANATION
    WELL LOCATION AND
    PERMIT NUMBER
    N
    0	1 Mile
    	1	i	I
    SCALE
    
    FIGURE 7A-4 " LOCATIONS OF PERMITTED WATER WELLS NEAR
    THE COLLINS DRAW PROJECT AREA
    159
    [5-140]
    

    -------
    Table 7A-2. Water Well Permits Within About 1.5 Miles of the Collins
    Draw Permit Boundaries
    Permit	Owner/
    Number	Location	Well Name
    (£ i Section, T, R)
    Well Water Depth
    Depth Use to Water
    (feet)	(feet)
    P11903W NW/NW 27, 43N, 76W Brown Land Co.
    Doughstick No. 2
    P11898W SW/SW 30, 43N, 75W Brown Land Co.
    Ray's No. 1
    P12296W NW/NE 31, 43N, 75W Ruby Ranch
    JDR No. 8
    P11890W SE/NW 1, 42N, 76W Brown Land Co.
    Adam Foote No. 1
    P53807W SW/SE 1, 42N, 76W Cleveland Cliffs
    CD-MN 7
    P14647W SW/SW 2, 42N, 76W Taylor Ranch
    Taylor 21-2
    P14646W SW/NE 3, 42N, 76W Taylor Ranch
    Taylor 21-1
    960 Stock Flowing
    1 gpm
    400 Stock 115
    800 Stock
    375 Stock 105
    578 Monitor 116
    Stock ' Flowing
    5 gpm
    383 Stock
    80
    160
    [5-141]
    

    -------
    R 7 6 W
    explanation
    p € *' M E T E «
    i hc a
    PERMIT
    AREA
    Figure 7A-5. Collins Draw Permit Boundary.
    161
    [5-142]
    

    -------
    TOPSOIL STORAGE p
    Aktwz 4i
    302
    (trend wdl)
    w»*
    V
    ^ u t
    Wellfieid Tonk ,r.'
    Manifold (MobiW^i .
    Shack -N x. Grounding
    .)~ 0
    (MoBile) t
    Wall
    First Mirw AreO
    /H-MUO PfT
    £uwi*0
    Second Mine Area
    290
    233
    261 260
    « •
    225 262
    .258
    260
    •
    
    #
    266
    283
    
    • 2
    20*
    •
    •
    28?
    144
    *90
    * 139
    •
    *
    •
    261
    •
    273
    •
    B zra
    •
    2T9
    231
    292
    232
    £MW23Q
    ^MW2J9
    3	30	100 ft
    -H
    0	30 «.
    LEOENO
    A Low«f Sond«ton« («l«9T «ond) momiot
    ¦ Up»«f SoAdtrotM (A0-Softd) Uomiot W«u	aMW296
    A 0'« Sondl»OM« (USondl Momter W«il	^
    • Infection/Prodwcitort
    Figure 7A-6. Location Map of the Facilities at the Collins Draw
    Mine (after Cleveland Cliffs Iron Company, 1981a).
    162
    [5-143]
    

    -------
    pattern. Wells 242, 243, 296, and 297 were not used in mining
    operations; the latter two were added to the well field for restoration
    operations. The B field consists of 33 wells, although mining
    operations utilized only 20 wells that initially formed four connecting
    production cells. These cells were irregularly shaped 7-spot patterns
    with well spacings ranging between 20 and 40 ft.
    Well drilling and completion were planned to prevent escape of
    lixiviants to any part of the overburden. The first series of wells
    were drilled and completed using the design shown in Figure 7A-7.
    Basically, the procedure was to drill to the top of the mineralized
    sand, set the casing, and cement the annulus between the casing and the
    original hole wall. After the cement set up, the mineralized sand zone
    was drilled out and the hole deepened until the underlying shale or
    siltstone was encountered. The ore-sand interval was then screened
    using a telescoping screen and rubber packer, or left open. Alternative
    completion techniques involved drilling to the bottom of mineralized
    sand, setting casing with or without screen attached, and then cementing
    the annulus between the casing and hole wall with the aid of a cement
    basket designed to prevent cement from reaching the mineralized zone.
    The total depth of all wells ranged from approximately 470 to 500. ft
    (CCIC, 1981a).
    Several types of casing ranging in diameter from 2 to 8 inches were
    used. The typical well was 4 to 6 inch nominal diameter and was cased
    with PVC, CPVC or fiberglass pipe. Wells 139, 146, and 191 were cased
    with a lightweight 6 5/8-inch steel casing.
    163
    [5-144]
    

    -------
    c ( M c h r
    OK rOM< OIHiCD
    U«l(h
    CCUCNTIMQ CtttttQ
    Figure
    164
    [5-1451
    7A-7. Typical Well Completion, Collins Draw (from Permit 3 Ru).
    

    -------
    Monitor wells were drilled and completed using both techniques
    described above. All monitor wells in or below the production zone were
    screened. A summary of the monitor well completion data is given in
    Table 7A-3.
    Operational History
    Mining Phase
    Research and development testing at the Collins Draw mine began in
    the A-l well field in March 1980 and was expanded to the B well field in
    November 1980 (Figure 7A-6). Ammonium carbonate 1ixiviant was used in
    both well fields.
    Approximately 340,000 gallons of water that had been treated by
    reverse osmosis to remove calcium were injected into the production zone
    of the A-l field before leaching began. This injection was intended to
    displace formation water containing high calcium concentrations which
    would react with ammonium carbonate 1ixiviant and cause precipitation of
    calcium carbonate. Injection of the ammonium carbonate 1ixiviant and an
    oxidant (hydrogen peroxide and/or oxygen) commenced on April 2, 1980.
    The lixiviant, which contained from 1 to 5 grams per liter (g/L)
    carbonate and from 1 to 4 g/L ammonium, was injected at rates of 0.1 to
    20 gpm under well head pressures ranging from 15 to 30 pounds per square
    inch (psi). Approximately 1.3x10® gallons of lixiviant were used in
    mining the A-l well field. The average rate of lixiviant injection was
    4.2 gpm.
    165
    [5-146]
    

    -------
    Table 7A-3. Monitoring Well Completion Data, Collins Draw Project.
    Hole
    Number
    237 W
    Relation to
    Production
    Zone
    Below
    Casing	Total	Cement
    Size	Depth	Depth
    501
    493
    Screened
    Interval
    481.4-501
    238 W
    In
    5"
    529
    452
    462-529
    239 W
    In
    465
    407
    407-465
    240 W
    In
    5"
    519
    444
    462-519
    241 W
    In
    5"
    475
    428
    418-475
    230 W
    Above
    6"
    395
    312
    Open hole
    No screen
    1	Well 237 W was an attempt to locate any aquifer lying below the production
    zone. No aquifer was found.
    2	Well 230 W is completed in and open to the "A" Sand aquifer and is
    immediately above the production zone.
    166
    [5-147]
    

    -------
    From April 2 to July 3, 1980, the A-l well field was operated as
    follows: Wells 248 and 249 were utilized as production wells and wells
    244, 246, 247, 252, 253, and 254 were injection wells. In July, wells
    252, 253, and 254 were shut down and the mode of operation (production
    or injection) of the remaining wells, with the exception of well 249,
    was changed frequently until termination of the test on November 3,
    1980. Well 249 was operated exclusively as a production well during
    mining of the A-l well field. Production and injection rates were
    balanced at the Collins Draw Project because no evaporation pond was
    constructed to contain waste water. CCIC did not routinely bleed mining
    solution from the circulating solutions.
    Injection of lixiviant at the B well field began on November 4,
    1980, with the transfer of approximately 900,000 gallons of solution
    from the A-l well field production zone into the B well field production
    zone. The operational mode (production or injection) of any given well
    was varied during the course of the B well field mining test in an
    effort to achieve desired operating flow rates. Lixiviant injection and
    solution recovery were conducted in a manner similar to that of the A-l
    well field. Mining continued in the B well field until July 23, 1981,
    when restoration was initiated.
    Uranium was recovered by passing the produced solution through ion
    exchange resins which captured the ammonium uranyl tricarbonate complex.
    A strong ammonium carbonate solution was used to strip the uranium
    complex from the ion exchange resins (CCIC, 1981a, p. 53). Table 7A-4
    presents reported chemical analyses for the solutions injected and
    produced during B well field operations. Solutions injected and
    167
    [5-148]
    

    -------
    Table 7A-4. Reported Chemical Analysis of Lixiviant and Produced
    Solution in the B Well Field at the Collins	Draw Mine
    (after Cleveland Cliffs Iron Company, 1981;	from WDEQ
    files).
    Concentration	Concentration
    Injected	Production
    Parameter	Lixiviant	Solution
    (4/19/81)
    TDS
    4,100 - 15,100
    2,940 - 3,060
    Sodium
    138
    138
    Calcium
    40
    40
    Magnesium
    2
    2
    Sulfate
    420
    420
    Chloride
    475
    475
    Carbonate
    1,000 - 5,000
    1,404
    Bicarbonate
    1,000 - 5,000
    
    Hydroxide
    82
    82
    pH
    9.1 - 9.7
    9.1
    Conductivity (umhos/cm)
    4,147
    4,147
    Ammonia (NH, as N)
    1,000 - 4,000
    420
    Ni trate
    10.0
    10.0
    Nitrite
    1.25
    1.25
    Fluoride
    0.57
    0.57
    Total Alkalinity
    2,582
    2,582
    Total Hardness
    108
    108
    Boron
    <0.01
    <0.01
    Aluminum
    <0.05
    <0.05
    Arsenic
    0.056
    0.056
    Barium
    <0.03
    <0.03
    Cadmium
    <0.002
    <0.002
    Chromium
    <0.01
    <0.01
    Copper
    <0.01
    <0.01
    Iron
    <0.01
    <0.01
    Lead
    <0.01
    <0.01
    Manganese
    <0.01
    <0.01
    Mercury
    <0.0005
    <0.0005
    Nickel
    <0.02
    <0.02
    Selenium
    2.2
    2.2
    Zinc
    <0.005
    <0.005
    Molybdenum
    0.06
    0.06
    Uranium
    0 - 2
    30 - 150
    Vanadium
    4.2
    4.2
    Radium-226 (pCi/L)
    237.6
    237.6
    168
    [5-149]
    

    -------
    produced at the A-l well field reportedly were similar in composition to
    those of the B well field.
    Restoration Phase
    Several techniques were used in an attempt to restore background or
    near background water quality in the ore zone aquifer at the Collins
    Draw Mine. Restoration of the A-l well field was initiated on November
    4, 1980 with the transfer of 1ixiviant from the A-l well field to the B
    well field. A total of about 900,000 gallons of solution was pumped
    from the A-l well field ore zone through wells 246, 248, and 249. This
    procedure resulted in a partial ground-water sweep of the 1-Sand and a
    general improvement in ground-water quality. Ammonia concentrations
    were reduced from 720 mg/L to 420 mg/L. A more complete ground water
    sweep was considered impractical by CCIC because no evaporation ponds
    had been constructed that could contain the volume of water which would
    have been produced by an extended sweep.
    Recirculation, with treatment at the surface by ion exchange, was
    employed subsequent to the 1ixiviant transfer to further reduce the
    concentrations of ammonium (NH^+) and uranium in the ground water. As
    ammonium ions from the ground water were replaced by hydrogen ions from
    the ion exchange resin, the lower pH water injected into the ore zone
    reportedly dissolved calcium carbonate from the host sandstone.
    Increased calcium concentrations resulted in the displacement of
    ammonium and hydrogen ions in the cation exchange resin and in the
    production zone aquifer itself, which resulted in an increase in ammonia
    concentration from 420 to 630 mg/L (NRC, 1983). About 700,000 gallons
    169
    [5-150]
    

    -------
    of water were treated by ion exchange; the process was terminated due to
    poor efficiency of the resins for ammonium removal and reduced well
    productivity.
    Reverse osmosis (R.O.) technology was utilized next for restoration
    of the A-l well field. Solution was produced from the ore zone aquifer
    and passed through the R.O. unit; the treated water then was injected
    into the ore zone. This method was utilized for only 33 days because
    CCIC considered it ineffective in reducing ammonia concentrations.
    However, information provided by CCIC shows that ammonia concentrations
    were reduced in the withdrawn ground water from 630 to 140 mg/L by the
    R.O. method. About 2,200,000 gallons of ground water were treated by
    R.O. during this period.
    Removal of ammonia by air stripping was the next method of
    restoration applied to the A-l well field. Sodium hydroxide and/or
    potassium hydroxide was added to ground water produced from the well
    field to promote the conversion of ammonium (NH^*) to ammonia (NH^).
    Ihe water then was circulated through an air stripping column to
    volatilize and remove the ammonia. The treated water was injected into
    the ore zone following this procedure. Air stripping was discontinued
    after 132 days on July 25, 1981, when ammonia concentrations in produced
    water had stabilized at 25 mg/L as N. Approximately 4,400,000 gallons
    of water were circulated through the air stripping column and
    subsequently reinjected into the 1-Sand. Table 7A-5 presents a summary
    of the restoration effects described above.
    The last of the initial restoration efforts at the A-l well field
    involved injection of clean ground water into the ore-zone in
    170
    [5-151]
    

    -------
    Table 7A-5. Summary of A-2 Well Field Restoration Effects, Collins Draw
    Mire, Wyoming (after Cleveland Cliffs Iron Company, 1984).
    Millions of
    Gallons
    Treated or	Pore
    Method	Injected	Volumes Time NH, as N
    (days) (fflg/L)
    Ground Water Sweep	.9
    Cation Exchange	.75
    Reverse Osmosis	1.1
    Air Stripping	4.4
    5.4	15	420
    4.5	11	630
    6.5	33	140
    26	132	25
    171
    [5-152]
    

    -------
    November-December 1982, to dilute remaining ammonia and TDS
    concentrations. The water was obtained from the project's potable water
    source that contained less than 500 mg/L TDS and no detectable selenium,
    uranium, or ammonia (CCIC, 1984).
    Restoration of the B well field began on July 14, 1981 by pumping
    well 286, treating the produced solution by air stripping for ammonia
    removal, and then reinjecting the treated water through wells 280, 283,
    284, and 285. Potassium hydroxide was added to the water prior to entry
    into the air stripping column to promote the volatilization of ammonia
    and to maintain elevated TDS concentrations in the water injected into
    the ore zone. CCIC believed that high TDS concentrations in the
    injected fluid would promote removal of ammonium from clays in the ore
    zone aquifer by ion exchange. Subsequently, various combinations of
    pumping and injection wells in the B well field were utilized to supply
    water to the air stripping unit and to inject the treated water into the
    ore zone aquifer. From August 3 to November 19, 1981, fresh water was
    injected into the ore zone aquifer through wells 260 and 261. Over
    25,000 gallons of ground water had been treated in this manner when the
    process was terminated in January 1982.
    A ground-water sweep of the B well field ore zone aquifer was
    initiated following the acquisition of a surface discharge permit. This
    permit was necessary to accommodate discharge because no evaporation
    pond had been constructed at the site. From February 2 to March 23,
    1982 over 3,300,000 gallons of ground water were removed from the ore
    zone aquifer; this water was discharged to the surface and was not
    reinjected. Overall water quality improved and ammonia levels dropped
    to 120 mg/L following the ground water sweep.
    172
    [5-153]
    

    -------
    Air stripping for ammonia removal was employed again from March 23
    to July 13, 1982. From July 13 to November 10, 1982, ground water
    sweeping was conducted and the produced water was discharged to the
    surface under a NPDES permit. Finally, from November 11 to December 23,
    1982, approximately 5,000 gallons of "outside" water were injected into
    each of 14 wells (some of which are in the A-l Well field) selected by
    the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality in an attempt to reduce
    ammonium, selenium, and arsenic concentrations further by dilution.
    Ammonium levels averaged 2.54 mg/L at the culmination of B well field
    initial restoration efforts.
    Post-Restoration Ground Water Quality
    Following the conclusion of initial restoration efforts at the A-l
    well field, ground water was sampled over a six month period to
    ascertain the adequacy of restoration and the stability of water quality
    in the mined aquifer. Restoration was determined to be unsuccessful
    because the average concentrations of total dissolved solids (TDS),
    ammonium, arsenic, selenium, vanadium, Radium-226, and pH exceeded
    either baseline or Wyoming DEQ Class I ground-water quality standards
    (Table 7A-6).
    Initial restoration at the B well field ended with injection of
    approximately 5,000 gallons of "outside" water into the wells.
    Following this work, samples were collected from all A-l and B well
    field wells to determine ammonium, selenium and arsenic concentrations.
    Table 7A-7 presents the analyses for this round of post-restoration
    sampling. The data show that arsenic concentrations were below the
    173
    [5-154]
    

    -------
    Table 7A-6. Comparison of water quality before and after
    restoration of the A-l well field at the Collins
    Draw mine (after Cleveland Cliffs Iron Company.
    1982» and U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission#
    1983 ).
    Parameter	Baseline Class I Average after 6 Month
    ( mg/L )	Average3	Standard Stability Period
    TDS
    414
    500
    582
    Ammoni a
    0.18
    0.5
    35
    Arsenic
    <0.02
    0.05
    0.335
    Selenl urn
    <0.01
    0.01
    0.79
    Vanadlum
    <0.05
    —
    0.33
    pH (units)
    7.5 to 8.7
    6.5 to 8.5
    9.1
    Radlum-226
    (pC1/L)
    21.6
    5
    >100
    aAverage of all wells sampled 1n A-l and B well fields.
    ^Average of A-l wells.
    174
    [5-155]
    

    -------
    Table 7A-7. Final restoration sampling results, Collins Draw Mine, Wyoming
    (after Cleveland Cliffs Iron Company, 1983b).
    Well	Samole1
    No.	Date	Ammonia Arsenic Selenium	Type
    190
    231
    232
    233
    234
    237
    242
    243
    244
    246
    247
    248
    249
    252
    253
    254
    255
    258
    250
    261
    252
    265
    273
    275
    276
    277
    278
    280
    281
    282
    283
    2B4
    285
    286
    287
    288
    290
    291
    292
    293
    296
    297
    303
    Date
    Ammonia
    Arseni c
    Selenium
    
    (mq/L)
    (mq/L)
    (na/L)
    12-09
    13.8
    0.015
    0.112
    12-09
    1.51
    0.005
    0.126
    12-10
    1.68
    0.006
    0.010
    12-09
    5.70
    0.015
    0.058
    12-14
    0.85
    0.006
    0.025
    12-09
    2.38
    0.009
    0.126
    12-09
    0.57
    0.012
    0.101
    12-09
    0.20
    0.002
    0.005
    12-09
    0.85
    0.003
    0.010
    12-09
    4.50
    0.008
    0.019
    12-09
    0.36
    0.003
    0.004
    12-09
    11.60
    0.076
    0.223
    12-09
    <0.05
    0.002
    0.014
    12-09
    27.00
    0.008
    0.166
    12-09
    0.24
    0.002
    0.004
    12-09
    0.85
    0.009
    0.013
    12-09
    21.00
    0.009
    0.792
    12-10
    13.80
    0.006
    0.230
    12-10
    <0.05
    0.002
    0.021
    12-09
    0.85
    0.003
    0.030
    12-10
    5.70
    0.009
    0.094
    12-11
    <0.05
    <0.001
    0.002
    12-10
    1.51
    0.002
    0.002
    12-11
    <0.05
    <0.001
    <0.001
    12-14
    2.20
    0.011
    0.054
    12-10
    6.50
    0.005
    0.030
    12-11
    <0.05
    0.002
    <0.001
    12-10
    <0.05
    0.002
    0.003
    12-10
    <0.05
    0.002
    0.002
    12-10
    <0.05
    0.002
    <0.001
    12-10
    <0.05
    0.002
    0.005
    12-10
    <0.05
    0.002
    0.002
    12-09
    0.85
    0.015
    0.162
    12-10
    <0.05
    0.002
    0.003
    12-10
    0.27
    0.002
    0.007
    12-10
    <0.05
    <0.001
    0.001
    12-10
    0.20
    0.002
    0.006
    12-13
    <0.05
    <0.001
    0.001
    12-10
    <0.05
    0.002
    0.001
    12-10
    <0.05
    0.002
    0.003
    12-09
    2.70
    0.002
    0.006
    12-09
    0.74
    0.096
    1.220
    12-13
    <0.05
    0.002
    0.001
    P
    P
    P
    P
    P
    P
    P
    B
    8
    P
    B
    P
    B
    P
    B
    P
    8
    B
    P
    B
    B
    3
    B
    3
    P
    P
    B
    8
    8
    B
    B
    B
    P
    8
    B
    8
    B
    B
    B
    B
    B
    P
    B
    i
    P = Pumped; B = Bailed
    175
    [5-156]
    

    -------
    Class I standard in all but two wells (248 and 297); selenium
    concentrations were above the Class I standard of 0.01 mg/L in 20 wells
    and exceeded 0.10 mg/L in 10 wells. Ammonia concentrations were below
    30 mg/L (a target set by the Wyoming WDEQ/WQD) in all wells.
    The most recent water-quality data available for review were
    reported by CCIC (1983a) in a submittal to the WDEQ/LQD and are
    summarized in Table 7A-8. These post-restoration data are averaged for
    10 wells in the B well field sampled 10 months after restoration efforts
    culminated. This monitoring revealed that ammonium, TDS, selenium,
    uranium, sulfate, pH, and Radium-226 values continued to exceed baseline
    and/or Class I standards. Figure 7A-8 is a graph of uranium and MH^+
    concentrations in the B well field after restoration. In addition, the
    average concentrations of TDS, sulfate, ammonium, and selenium increased
    steadily over the 10 month period.
    Wastewater Disposal
    The omission of an evaporation pond, the most common means of
    excess water disposal, in the Collins Draw mine facilities required CCIC
    to operate with balanced production and injection rates. Had an
    evaporation pond or other means of disposal been available, other
    restoration methods such as directional ground-water sweeping with
    reinjection of treated water could have been more feasible. The
    existence of disposal facilities would also have benefited reverse
    osmosis operations by providing more flexibility in the disposal of the
    waste stream.
    176
    [5-157]
    

    -------
    Table 7A-8. Comparison of Water Quality Bedore and 10 Months After
    Restoration of the B Well Field at the Collins Draw Mine
    (after Cleveland Cliffs Iron Company, 1982 and 1983; U.S.
    Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1983).
    Concentration After 10
    Month Stability Period
    Parameter
    (mg/l)
    Baseline
    Average
    Class I
    Standard
    Average'5
    Range
    TOS
    414
    500
    594
    341 ¦
    - 770
    Sulfate
    159
    250
    252
    171 ¦
    - 388
    pH (units)
    6.0 - 8.7
    6.5 - 8.5
    8.7
    7.6 ¦
    - 9.5
    Ammonia
    0.18
    0.5
    34.3
    1.2 ¦
    - 57
    Selenium
    <0.01
    0.01
    1.02
    <.001 ¦
    - 3.17
    Uranium
    0.05
    5.0
    5.28
    1.4 ¦
    - 9.0
    Radium - 226
    21.6
    5.0
    36.4 ± 6.0
    10.5
    - 82
    (pCi/L)
    a Average of all wells sampled in A-l and B Well Field,
    k Average of B Field Wells.
    177
    [5-158]
    

    -------
    •0-,
    R
    «-i=	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	T	1
    I	X	3	<	I	4	7	•	*10
    Months After Restoration Ceased
    Figure 7A-8. Concentrations of uranium and ainmonia in the B well field
    following restoration (modified after Cleveland Cliffs
    Iron Company, 1983a).
    178
    [5-159]
    

    -------
    Disposal facilities are necessary during production to allow
    recovery in excess of injection. Their absence prevented CCIC from
    over-producing for an extended period of time. In theory, in situ
    uranium leaching can be accomplished with completely balanced production
    and injection rates. However, in reality, fluctuations in production
    and/or injection rates occur often. Continuous overproduction provides a
    measure of operating safety that was unavailable to CCIC.
    CCIC (1984) reported that difficulty in reducing radium
    concentrations to acceptable levels in reverse osmosis waste water
    inhibited discharge of the waste stream to the surface and this
    detracted from the success of reverse osmosis restoration. Four
    additional complicating factors hindered the successful completion of
    restoration by reverse osmosis. These are:
    1.	The WDEQ placed stringent limits on the amount of radium,
    uranium, and total gallons of waste water that CCIC could
    discharge to their subsurface drain field. CCIC was not able
    to operate reverse osmosis for a sufficient period of time
    under these limitations to successfully restore the 1-Sand
    aquifer. Reverse osmosis probably would not have been more
    effective than the air stripping in reducing ammonium
    concentrations, however, total dissolved solids would have
    been reduced.
    2.	CCIC did not have adequate storage facilities to contain the
    waste stream from the reverse osmosis unit. Without the
    ability to discharge the waste stream to the drain field, CCIC
    was unable to use reverse osmosis effectively to restore the
    1-Sand aquifer.
    [5-160]
    179
    

    -------
    3.	Problems with calcium precipitation caused plugging of reverse
    osmosis resins and membranes. A 20% bleed stream was
    necessary to avoid plugging problems. Disposal of this large
    bleed stream was hindered by the absence of adequate waste
    water storage facilities.
    4.	Reverse osmosis was not effective at reducing ammonium
    concentrations to baseline concentrations. Reverse osmosis
    reduced the bulk of the ammonium in the withdrawn ground water
    (from 630 to 140 mg/L); however, reverse osmosis probably
    would have been ineffective at reducing relatively low
    concentrations of ammonium in the withdrawn ground water.
    These problems probably could have been overcome if an evaporation pond
    had been available for the disposal ot the reverse osmosis waste stream.
    Evaluation of Restoration Techniques Applied at Collins Draw
    The piecemeal manner in which CCIC approached restoration of the
    A-l and B well fields did not promote success in reducing both the
    ammonium and total dissolved solids concentrations to premining quality.
    Ion exchange, reverse osmosis and air stripping were fairly effective at
    reducing ammonium concentrations m the withdrawn ground water, but they
    were ineffective in reducing total dissolved solids to baseline ranges.
    Longer-term restoration efforts employing enhanced methods of permanent
    ammonium removal from clays would be necessary to maintain low ammonium
    concentrations in the ground water because ammonium is continually
    desorbing from ion-exchange sites on the clays in the aquifer into the
    180
    [5-1S1]
    

    -------
    ground water. The reinjection of withdrawn ground water treated by
    reverse osmosis, ion exchange or air stripping will not reduce the
    ammonium concentrations on the clays significantly. These methods are
    capable of reducing the ammonium concentrations only in the withdrawn
    ground water.
    The attempts to remove ammonium from clays in the aquifer by
    maintaining a high total dissolved solids concentration in the ground
    water could be considered an enhanced method of ammonium removal.
    However, CCIC did not make any attempt to control the pH of the injected
    solutions, nor did they make a sufficient effort to reduce the high
    dissolved solids concentration in the ground water to premimng levels
    after the completion of the procedures for ammonium removal.
    After the completion of procedures to remove ammonium from clays in
    the aquifer, a more rigorous approach to restoration (such as
    directional ground-water sweeping, as has been conducted successfully at
    other in situ mines) probably would have been more effective at removing
    lixiviant and reducing dissolved solids in the mined aquifer. In
    directional ground-water sweeping, restoration theoretically progresses
    across the mined portion of the aquifer. Pumping contaminated ground
    water from wells within the production well field(s) and injecting water
    of baseline or better quality (i.e., treated by reverse osmosis or
    electrodialysis) into the aquifer beyond the zone of contamination
    produces this effect. Such a restoration program would have combined
    the effectiveness of ground-water sweeping with the advantages of
    conserving water. In addition, substantially less waste water storage
    capacity is needed than with regular ground water sweeping; however,
    181
    [5-152]
    

    -------
    waste water storage facilities would be needed to contain the waste
    water from bleed streams.
    Attempts by CCIC to reduce total dissolved solids by dilution were
    ineffective. By injecting "outside" water into the 1-Sand, CCIC was
    able to reduce the dissolved solids concentration in the immediate
    vicinity of the injection wells. However, ground water with elevated
    levels of dissolved solids was pushed out of the well field, and remains
    in the aquifer at the present time.
    Past and Present Ground-Water Impacts
    Ground water in well patterns A-l and B at the Collins Draw site
    has not, at the time of this report, been sufficiently restored to
    satisfy the WDEQ/LQD that pre-mining baseline quality has been achieved.
    The principal problems with restoration progress at this time are
    elevated concentrations of ammonia, uranium, radium, selenium, sulfate,
    and total dissolved solids (TDS). The WDEQ/LQD is involved in
    continuing actions to rectify the situation at Collins Draw, by
    requiring the site operator to undertake additional activities to
    accomplish ground-water restoration.
    Prediction of Future Ground-Water Impacts
    Predictions of future effects of the activities which have taken
    place at the Collins Draw in situ mining site cannot be accurately made
    at this time. The ultimate level of ground-water restoration which will
    182
    [5-163]
    

    -------
    be attained at the site is not known, since the operator is under
    direction from the WDEQ/LQD and NRC to continue restoration actions.
    Prediction of future impacts based upon the present level of restoration
    is misleading, since it is probable that the amount of contaminants in
    the Collins Draw ground water will be reduced before final abandonment
    of the site. None the less, computer modeling of future impacts based
    upon the present level of ground-water contamination at the Collins Draw
    has been performed. This was done to give some idea of the possible
    impacts resulting from an improperly restored in situ uranium mining
    experiment.
    Although the aquifer affected by the in-situ mining has not been
    completely restored to its baseline condition, the facility site has not
    yet been abandoned. The operator is under direction by both the
    WDEQ-LQD and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to develop plans for
    additional restoration activities, but the extent to which these
    activities will be successful is not clear at this time. For this
    reason, future ground-water impacts of the Collins Draw project cannot
    be accurately predicted at this time.
    A worst case scenario of future impacts can be considered, however.
    A plausible assumption for such a scenario would be that no further
    restoration is accomplished, and that the A-l and B well fields are
    ultimately abandoned with chemical concentrations in the aquifer at the
    same levels as at present. These chemicals would begin moving out of
    the project area at a rate approximating the local ground-water velocity
    (6.3 feet per year).
    183
    [5-164]
    

    -------
    Chemical concentrations of ammonia, selenium, radium, uranium and
    .the other contaminants injected or mobilized during the experiment would
    be gradually attenuated as the "slug" of contaminated water moved into
    previously uncontaminated areas of the aquifer. Ammonia and radium
    concentrations, for example, would be reduced as the ammonium and radium
    ions in solution were eventually adsorbed on ion exchange sites in the
    formation. Uranium would eventually reprecipitate as a salt in the
    formation, in much the same manner as the uranium was originally
    deposited along a "roll front" along the boundary between up-gradient
    (oxidized) formation materials and down-gradient (reduced) formation
    materials. Other contaminants would be similarly redeposited as mineral
    species within the formation.
    The distance which these contaminants would move before being
    reduced to background concentrations would vary, depending upon a number
    of factors involving the aquifer geochemistry and interaction among the
    contaminants. Use of a model to predict this information for all of the
    contaminants of concern at Collins Draw would be a complex undertaking,
    and is beyond the scope of this study. It appears, however, that even
    under worst case conditions, the chemical contaminants in the A-l and B
    well fields would not migrate to any location where ground water from
    the affected aquifer is presently being withdrawn for use.
    Recommendations for Mitigation of Existing Ground-Water Pollution
    A wastewater evaporation/storage pond could be constructed at the
    Collins Draw site, and additional restoration activities could then be
    undertaken and continued for a sufficient length of time to achieve
    184
    [5-155]
    

    -------
    restoration. The restoration techniques previously practiced by the
    facility operator would appear to be adequate for this purpose, if
    adequate wastewater management facilities are available to receive the
    inevitable byproduct streams. Techniques which might be employed
    include removal of ammonia from formation clays by ion exchange, using
    concentrated solutions of cations such as sodium and calcium; lowering
    of TDS in the aquifer by treating formation water by reverse osmosis
    prior to reinjection; and/or a ground-water sweep, practiced either
    following or in lieu of the other techniques mentioned. All of these
    techniques, and others, were practiced with relative success at Collins
    Draw. The only drawback to each is that substantial quantities of
    wastewater are produced and the facility operator has not, prior to this
    time, had adequate wastewater management facilities to enable
    continuation of the techniques for the time necessary to achieve
    restoration. This problem has been exacerbated, but not caused, by the
    original use of ammonia in the mining process.
    Prevention of Ground-Water Pollution at Similar Sites
    The following recommendations are made for the prevention of
    problems similar to those suffered at Collins Draw at other
    experimental in situ uranium mines. Each recommendation is accompanied
    by a brief explanation including the reasons for which it has been made.
    1. Adequate surface facilities should be required for any
    injection project or facility where ground-water restoration
    is anticipated. Specifically, experimental in situ uranium
    mining facilities should be required to have sufficient
    wastewater treatment or storage capacity to handle the maximum
    185
    [5-165]
    

    -------
    quantity of wastewater which might reasonably be expected to
    be produced during mining and restoration operations. The
    necessary capacity must be determined by consultation between
    experienced professional staff of the permit applicant and the
    regulatory agencies. In the case of the Collins Draw project,
    the applicant did not propose a wastewater pond, and the WDEQ
    did not require one. This may have been due to a lack of
    experience by the individual parties preparing and reviewing
    the permit application. It should be stressed, however, that
    regulatory staff members should be encouraged to raise
    questions concerning the peripheral facilities at an in situ
    mine, when their experience warns them that inadequacies in
    such facilities may threaten irrepairable contamination of
    ground water.
    Pre-mining investigations should be sufficiently thorough to
    determine the approximate level of effort which will be
    required during the ground-water restoration phase of the
    experiment. Such investigations should take into account the
    chemical interactions of the lixiviant(s) to be used and
    formation minerals. At Collins Draw, the operator should have
    been aware that restoration of an aquifer mined with ammonia
    would require greater effort than if the same aquifer were
    mined with sodium carbonate or bicarbonate. Such an awareness
    might have prompted the operator, and the regulatory agencies
    involved, to give greater thought to the need for substantial
    wastewater management capacity at the site.
    186
    [5-
    

    -------
    CHAPTER 7B
    RENO RANCH PROJECT - ROCKY MOUNTAIN ENERGY COMPANY
    Introduction
    The Rocky Mountain Energy Company's (RMEC) Reno Ranch Project was
    selected for one of the three in situ uranium mining studies because: 1)
    it initially used sulfuric acid as a 1ixiviant; 2) sodium carbonate was
    also used as a 1 ixiviant; and 3) adequate data are available to assess
    the effects of the project on the local ground water.
    Site Hydroqeology
    The Reno Ranch Project site is located in the central Powder River
    Basin in sections 27 and 28, T.43N., R.73W., Campbell County, about 40
    miles south of Gillette, Wyoming. The Wasatch Formation of Eocene age
    out crops at the surface. It is composed of sandstone, claystone,
    siltstone, carbonaceous shale and thin coal seams. Sinuous lenses of
    sandstone deposited in a fluvial setting and which contain all known
    occurrences of uranium in the area, are from 500 feet to several miles
    wide, 1 to 8 miles long, and 10 to 100 feet thick. The north-south
    geologic cross-section presented on Figure 7B-1 details the stratigraphy
    in the project area. The sandstones are medium- to coarse-grained and
    arkosic (Hodson, 1973). At the Reno Ranch site, the depth to the top of
    the ore-bearing aquifer, also called the host sand, is 280 feet and the
    thickness of the aquifer is about 120 feet.
    187
    [5-168]
    

    -------
    MOfiTH
    CPOSS St CT\0N 8 -8
    SOUTH
    l.i\ *TlO\
    Ml
    5202.2
    JSM-I
    S210.4
    .
    5:u-2
    PI
    S2l.'.«
    13
    VI 3.(•
    USM I
    521*9
    4»O0-
    4 SOtf—
    norrowt!
    ftmw wkt winr a<
    HO
    ST }AMO
    MUOjTOWC
    M-3
    i»a»
    S200 - 	
    
    -------
    Ground-Water Occurrence and Flow
    The Wasatch Formation, which is the principal water-bearing
    formation in this area, consists of a series of local confined and
    unconfined aquifers. Depths to water locally range from zero to 315
    feet below ground surface in the vicinity of the Reno Ranch site. Wells
    in deeper aquifers are likely to produce more water than are wells in
    shallow aquifers. Wells open to thick saturated sandstones in the
    Wasatch Formation can produce over 250 gpm (Feathers and others, 1981).
    Yields from existing wells of record in the local area of Reno Ranch
    range from 5 to 40 gpm (Wyoming State Engineer, various). Recharge to
    the Wasatch locally is from precipitation; discharge of water is to
    small springs and seepage along stream drainages, by evaporation and
    transpiration, and by pumping of wells.
    An aquifer test conducted as part of the pre-permit site
    characterization revealed an anisotropic confined aquifer having a mean
    transmissivity of 235 ft /day, a mean hydraulic conductivity of 2.0
    ft/day, and a storage coefficient of 4.6 x 10"^.
    The direction of local ground water flow was obtained from data
    derived from production-zone wells and is shown with the potentiometric
    surface of the production zone aquifer on Figure 7B-2. Using the
    hydraulic gradient computed from the potentiometric surface and measured
    values of directional transmissivity, thickness, and a porosity of .28,
    a ground-water flow of 3.1 feet per year in a direction N 36°E was
    obtained. This is consistent with the regional ground-water trend found
    by other investigators (In Situ Consulting, 1978).
    189
    f5-170J
    

    -------
    
    
    
    «»10 to f!
    «*M ®0 f.
    *¦»*
    
    -2			Q.
    °l V*"*
    .ul^
    ^Vo
    
    
    « »jt eo "
    4951 to*'
    49JI 20''
    4 9V 50 it
    49JI 40 M
    ~ »5« SO M
    _ 49II «0 »»
    49Ji tO "
    
    re
    \c ^
    V0^e<\
    1V1^
    
    
    \o^'
    
    ,tf>
    
    ,c*
    
    \9°
    

    -------
    Ground-Water Quality
    Baseline water-quality data were obtained by RMEC from wells USM-1
    and LSM-1, drilled into the upper and lower sands respectively. (The
    lower sand underlies the confining mudstone at the bottom of the host
    sand). Table 7B-1 presents the range of baseline water-quality
    parameters for wells in those aquifers. The quality of water in the
    upper sand is generally better than that of the water in the lower sand,
    although neither water meets all of the quality criteria for Class I,
    II, or III waters. Both waters exceed the Class I and II standards for
    boron and pH, and the Class II and III standard for vanadium. The Class
    I iron standard is also exceeded by both waters, but iron concentrations
    are below the treatability limit of 5.0 mg/L. Water from the upper sand
    also exceeds the manganese standard for Class I and II waters. Water
    from the lower sand exceeds the Class I standards for ammonia and TDS,
    and exceeds the Class I and II standards for selenium and sulfate.
    Except for pH and vanadium, both waters meet the livestock (Class III)
    use suitability standards.
    Table 7B-2 lists constituent concentrations from wells in the
    production zone. The overall water quality in the host sand is good.
    However, because of elevated concentrations of numerous constituents, it
    does not meet the standards for Class I, II, or III waters. Class I
    standards for TDS, radium, selenium, and sulfate are exceeded in all
    cases, and for pH, boron, and manganese in some cases. Class II
    standards for TDS, sulfate, radium, and vanadium are exceeded in all
    cases, and for pH, boron, and selenium in some cases. Class III
    standards for mercury, radium, and vanadium are exceeded in all cases,
    191
    [5-172]
    

    -------
    Table 7B-1. Reno Ranch Project Baseline Water-Quality Ranges
    (from WDEQ files).
    USM-l
    LSM-l
    Alkalinity
    85.
    -
    262.
    127.
    -
    1370.
    Aluminum
    ND
    -
    1.45
    •
    30 -
    1. 03
    Ammonia
    ND
    -
    .21
    ND
    -
    26. 0
    Arsenic
    ND
    -
    .03
    ND
    -
    . 03
    Bicarbonate
    59.
    -
    322.
    0.
    -
    
    Boron
    ND
    -
    1.25
    •
    04 .
    1. 08
    Calcium
    10.
    -
    24.
    114.
    -
    203.
    Carbonate (as CO3)
    0.
    -
    129.
    58.
    -
    225.
    Chloride
    17.
    -
    36.
    13.
    -
    66.
    Conductivity
    300.
    -
    710.
    1840.
    -
    2800.
    Flounde
    •
    95 -
    1.07
    •
    29 -
    . 60
    Hardness (as CaC03)
    46.
    
    70.
    327.
    -
    507.
    Iron
    ND
    -
    .45
    ND
    -
    3.
    Magnesium
    2.
    
    28.
    ND
    
    60.
    Manganese
    ND
    
    1.10
    ND
    -
    . 02
    Nitrate
    ND
    
    .5
    ND
    -
    . 2
    Potassium
    6.
    
    13. "
    16.
    -
    52.
    pH
    8.
    1
    10.2
    10.
    6 -
    12. 06
    Selenium
    ND
    
    
    ND
    -
    . 04
    Silica
    ND
    
    6.4
    ND
    -
    12. 8
    Sodium
    95.
    
    110.
    80.
    -
    240.
    Sulfate
    11.
    
    59.
    25.
    -
    614.
    TDS
    315.
    
    494.
    1046.
    -
    1377.
    u3o8
    •
    001
    1.1
    ND
    -
    2.
    Vanadium
    ND
    
    6.
    ND
    -
    1 0.
    All data reported as ppm or mg/1. ND=Non Detectable^
    The parameters listed below were non-detectable:
    Barium Copper Molybdenum Silver
    Cadmium Lead Nickel 4,inc
    Chromium Hexavalent Mercury Nitrate
    192
    [5-173]
    

    -------
    Table 7B-2. Baseline Concentrations for RMEC Reno Ranch Pattern I
    Compliance Wells.
    Wells
    Production	Monitor
    Parameter
    P-l
    P-2
    M-l
    M-2
    M-3
    M-4
    PH
    7.9-8.6
    7.9-8.6
    7.9-8.3
    7.9-8.2
    8.2-10.8
    7.8-9.0
    Conducti vi ty
    1400-2000
    1400-2000
    1220-1570
    1250-1760
    1300-2000
    1220-1650
    Bicarbonate
    13-98
    13-98
    57-122
    56-121
    48-102
    33-102
    Carbonate
    0-75
    0-75
    0-48
    .32
    0-32
    0-65
    A1kalini ty
    
    
    
    
    
    
    (CaC03 eq)
    11-80
    11-18
    ¦ 47-100
    46-99
    39-84
    27-84
    Calcium
    80-120
    18-120
    79-99
    88-119
    88-113
    90-117
    Chioride
    8-18
    8-18
    14-21
    6-22
    10-19
    8-17
    Magnesium
    15-29
    15-29
    13-22
    15-28
    17-29
    19-29
    Potassium
    10-20
    10-20
    7-11.2
    7-11.3
    8-14
    8-12.9
    Sodium
    210-323
    210-323
    201-208
    220-290
    220-272
    200-278
    Sulfate
    700-900
    700-900
    486-776
    640-860
    625-821
    670-953
    TOS
    1124-1492
    1124-1492
    1006-1292
    1103-1392
    1063-1466
    970-1452
    A1uminum
    .1 - .28
    .1 - .28
    .1 - .18
    .1 -.49
    .1 -0.6
    .1 -.2
    Arsenic
    .01- .03
    .01- .03
    .01- .03
    .01-.03
    .01- .02
    ND- .01
    8ari um
    .1
    .1
    .1
    .1
    .1
    . 1
    Boron
    .11-2.6
    .11-2.5
    .1 -2.6
    .1 -1.49
    .1 - .36
    90-117
    Cadmium
    .01
    .01
    .01
    .01
    .01
    .01
    Chromi um
    .01
    .01
    .01
    .01
    .01
    .01
    Copper
    .01
    .01
    .01
    .01
    .01
    .01
    F1uoride
    NO- .22
    NO- .22
    .1 - .67
    .1 - .57
    .1 - .23
    .1 -.11
    Iron
    .01- .21
    .01- .21
    .01- .24
    .01- .17
    .1 - .13
    .1 -.34
    Lead
    .01
    .01
    .01
    .01
    .01
    .01
    Manganese
    .01- .03
    .01- .03
    .01- .07
    .01- .09
    .01- .02
    .01-.04
    Mercury
    .0001
    .0001
    .0001
    .0001 .0001
    .0001
    Molybdenum
    ND- .08
    NO- .08
    .01
    NO- .05
    NO- .09
    ND-.l
    Nickel
    .01
    .01
    .01
    .01
    .01
    .01
    Selenium
    NO- .05
    ND- .05
    .01-.02
    .01- .02
    .01- .02
    .01-.02
    Vanadium
    .05- .38
    .05- .38
    .05-.17
    .05- .17
    .05- .14
    N0-.05
    Zinc
    .01
    .1
    .1
    .1
    .1
    .01
    Urani um
    .15-1.05
    .15-1.05
    .023-.102
    .007- .027
    .205- .750
    .27-.55
    Radium
    160-686
    160-686
    109-398
    11.7-23.9
    67-207
    40-136
    NO - Not detectable
    All units mg/Lexcept pH (std units), conductivity (umhos/cm) and radium (pCi^l)
    193
    [5-174]
    

    -------
    and for boron and pH in some cases. Generally, Class II (irrigation
    use) standards are met and in many cases, the majority of the minor
    constituents are in the range of Class I (domestic use) water. Sulfate
    and boron are consistently in the range of Class III (livestock use)
    water. The concentrations of the other major constituents were in the
    range of Class II water or better. Vanadium, exceeded Class II and
    Class III standard by 40 to 380 percent, and radium concentrations
    ranged from 2.3 to 137 times the 5 picocuries per liter (pCi/L) standard
    Class I, II, and III.
    Ground-Water Use
    All but 2 wells drilled within 1 mile of the permit boundaries are
    used for stock watering. Those two exceptions were drilled by H.R.
    Underwood as observation wells to evaluate the subsurface water supply.
    Table 7B-3 lists the water well permits within one mile of the Reno
    Ranch permit boundaries. Figure 7B-3 shows the locations of wells
    listed in Table 7B-3 (Wyoming State Engineer, various).
    Description of Facilities
    The Reno Ranch permit area covers 39.32 acres, of which about 1
    acre was used for surface facilities. Injection wells II, 12, 13, and
    14 were drilled in a five-spot pattern around the central production
    well PI. Observation well OB-1 was drilled inside the pattern. Monitor
    wells Ml, M2, M3, and M4 were drilled outside the pattern to monitor
    subsurface flow movement during solution mining operations. All
    194
    [5-175],
    

    -------
    Table 7B-3. Water Well Permits With One Mile of the Reno Ranch Permit
    Boundaries.
    Permit	Owner/
    Number Location, S, T, R	Well Name
    Depth
    (feet)
    Use
    Water
    Level
    (feet)
    2880 SWSW 22, 34N, 72W
    20033 SWNE 23, 34N, 72W
    2882 SWNW 26, 34N, 72W
    2883 NWNE 28, 34N, 72W
    2881 NWNE 32, 34N, 72W
    18841 SWSW 32, 34N, 72W
    25454 NWNE 33, 34N, 72W
    25455 NENE 34, 34N, 72W
    20037 NENE 35, 34N, 72W
    Ed WiHard	230
    Willard No. 2
    H.W. Underwood 50
    Patterson No. 1
    Ed Willard	205
    Willard No. 4
    Ed Wi Hard	80
    Willard No. 5
    Ed Willard	90
    Willard No. 3
    Floyd Reno	300
    & Sons
    Tucker Wei 1
    H.R. Underwood 460
    Underwood 1
    H.R. Underwood 240
    Underwood No. 2
    H.R. Underwood 200
    Patterson No. 5
    Stock
    Stock
    Stock
    Stock
    Stock
    Stock
    210
    15
    150
    60
    65
    200
    Obs	280
    Abandoned
    Obs No
    Abondoned Water
    Stock 50
    195
    [5-176]
    

    -------
    R. 73 W.
    T. 43 N.
    20
    21
    22
    £2830
    20033#
    23
    
    2683#
    
    
    29
    28
    27
    ft2882
    26
    288l«
    25454^
    25455gf
    200370
    32
    33
    34
    35
    018641
    
    
    
    EXPLANATION
    0 2883 WELL LOCATION AND
    PERMIT NUMBER
    ^25454 ABANDONED WELL LOCATION
    AND PERMIT NUMBER
    N
    
    »
    0	1 Mile
    SCALE
    FIGURE 7B-3 LOCATIONS OF PERMITTED WATER WELLS
    NEAR THE RENO RANCH PROJECT AREA
    [5-177]
    196
    

    -------
    injection and production wells were completed in the ore zone.
    Observation well OB-1 and monitor wells Ml, M2, M3, and M4 were
    *
    completed through the entire thickness of the aquifer. Wells USM1
    and LSM1 were completed in the upper and lower sands, respectively.
    The wells at Reno Ranch were constructed by inserting fiberglass
    or PVC casing of a diameter smaller than the drill hole to a depth below
    the production zone. The casing was then anchored in place by pumping a
    cement, or cement-bentonite slurry, from the bottom of the hole up the
    annulus of the bore until the annulus was filled to the ground surface.
    Once the cement hardened, the hole was re-entered and completed to allow
    contact with the ore-bearing strata in the host formation (Permit No.
    479).
    The production and injection wells in Pattern II were originally
    completed by a combination of perforating and under-reaming, whereas the
    monitor wells were perforated. Figure 7B-4 shows typical well
    completions. Once the wells were completed, they were flushed by
    air-lifing or sustained pumping to remove residual cuttings, cement, and
    other potential contaminants. The Pattern II production, injection, and
    monitor wells were completed in basically the same manner used for
    Pattern I.
    197
    [5-173]
    

    -------
    Figure 7B-4.
    TYPICAL INJECTION-PRODUCTION WELL DIAGRAM
    RENO RANCH SITE
    str
    xtr
    w—m~w/
    3 SAM STREAK
    165 -t*0
    225' r
    1+G
    UUOSTONC
    wrtft SAMO ST*€AK
    259- 268'
    320
    ate
    samo 340
    
    -------
    Operational History
    Pattern I
    Pattern I Mining
    Injection of sulfuric acid for the purpose of leaching uranium in
    test Pattern I began in February 1979. Soon after acid injection began,
    problems with scaling due to gypsum formation were encountered. The
    gypsum was precipitated in the intergranular voids in the ore zone
    aquifer, and caused a substantial and increasing loss of permeability.
    By the middle of June 1979, scaling had become quite significant with a
    resultant loss in circulation between injection and recovery wells.
    Operations during the latter part of June and July 1979 were directed
    toward removal of scaling and re-establishment of circulation in the ore
    zone. By August 1979, the pattern was back in production, however,
    uranium values were significantly lower than anticipated and circulation
    problems persisted. The scaling problem was compounded by a fungus
    growth which contributed to well screen and filter plugging. By
    November 1979, the combination of circulation problems, low uranium
    recovery rates and high acid consumption suggested that leaching of the
    pattern should be discontinued and restoration efforts initiated. As of
    November 12, 1979, Pattern I leaching was terminated.
    Pattern I Restoration
    Acid injection was terminated and initial restoration of the
    pattern began November 16, 1979. Preliminary restoration efforts
    199
    [5-180]
    

    -------
    involved routing of the production flow from Well OB-1 (approximately 18
    gpm) to the ion exchange columns for uranium and calcium removal. A
    bleed stream of approximately 5 gpm was discharged to a lined
    evaporation pond while the production fluid, following uranium and
    calcium removal, was reinjected into the pattern.
    This restoration procedure continued through December 14, 1979,
    when production from Well P-l was initiated. Well P-l was adjusted to
    produce at about 15 gpm with Well OB-1 producing at approximately 10
    gpm, for a total production flow of 25 gpm. Because the flow from Well
    P-l was essentially barren of uranium and the flow from Well OB-1 was
    depleted of uranium, the total flow was routed directly to the calcium
    removal columns. During the remainder of December 1979, the flow
    through the calcium columns was gradually decreased while the flow to
    the injection tank (for reinjection) was correspondingly increased until
    the calcium columns were bypassed, with the total flow going to the
    injection tank.
    On December 21 1979, the total production flow was routed to the
    evaporation pond and restoration of the pattern by means of a
    ground-water sweep began. Production from the two wells continued at
    approximately 25 gpm through the remainder of December 1979 and January,
    February, and March 1980.
    During the first part of March 1980, a water treatment circuit was
    designed and constructed for the purpose of raising the pH of injected
    water from the 4.0-4.2 range to a pH of 7.5-8.5. Following potassium
    carbonate and flocculant addition, the production flow was routed to a
    liquid/solids separator. The underflow from this separator, containing
    200
    [5-181]
    

    -------
    precipitated calcium, metals and radionuclides, was discharged at a rate
    of about 4 gpm into a lined evaporation pond. The liquid overflow was
    reinjected into Pattern I at a pH of 7.0 to 7.5 at approximately 15 gpm.
    This method, though more successful than the earlier ion exchange
    process, was unable to accomplish restoration of Pattern No. 1 ground
    water for pH, sulfate, and TDS.
    The restoration difficulties at Reno Creek Pattern I stemmed from
    the use of an acid lixiviant to mine an ore body containing substantial
    amounts of basic minerals. This caused two major problems. First, the
    acid dissolved a portion of these basic minerals (particularly calcite
    and gypsum) liberating not only uranium but many other chemical species.
    In particular, relative large quantities of liberated calcium and
    magnesium moved through the aquifer toward the production wells. As the
    ground water moved through the formation, however, the acid was
    progressively removed by reaction with basic minerals and adsorption of
    hydrogen ions (acid components) upon cation exchange sites on clay
    particles. The ground-water pH subsequently rose, and the calcium and
    magnesium in solution were reprecipitated as sulfates. (The ground
    water contains high concentrations of dissolved sulfate.) This was the
    primary cause of the scaling which had such a deleterious effect upon
    mining activities. A more serious long term effect, however, was that
    many of the minor (and toxic) constituents of the minerals, such as
    vanadium, radium, and uranium were not fully reprecipitated at the final
    aquifer pH, and remained as dissolved contaminants after the cessation
    of mining activities.
    201
    [5-182]
    

    -------
    Compounding this liberation of contaminants was a second problem.
    The hydrogen ions adsorbed in the formation were preferentially held on
    the cation exchange sites of the formation clays. In simple terms,
    displacement of the hydrogen ions from those exchange sites would
    require a concentration of some other cation (calcium or sodium, for
    example) much higher than the hydrogen ion concentration that was
    originally required to displace the cations (calcium, mangnesium, and
    sodium) during the mining operation. Consequently, merely flushing
    "clean" water through the formation will not readily remove the hydrogen
    ions from the aquifer. Because of this fairly large supply of adsorbed
    acid, aquifer pH remained below baseline levels even after extended
    restoration efforts. As a result, uranium, vanadium, radium, sulfate,
    and total dissolved solids (TDS) concentrations could not be reduced to
    their baseline levels.
    Failure of the uranium recovery activities and restoration efforts
    at Pattern I at Reno Ranch can be traced to the use of an acid
    1ixiviant. The facility operator had previously used this type of
    lixiviant successfully at other sites, and apparently chose to use acid
    at Reno Ranch based upon that experience. The geochemistry of the Reno
    Ranch site, however, was substantially different from that of the other
    sites at which the operator had successfully used an acid lixiviant.
    The problems encountered at Reno Ranch Pattern I could have been
    avoided by more careful attention to aquifer geochemistry. There are,
    however, factors which lessen the environmental impact of the failed
    restoration at Pattern I. Aquifer contamination was limited to a very
    small area and it is believed that over a long period of time the
    202
    [5-183]
    

    -------
    aquifer will gradually return to its baseline quality. Active
    restoration at Pattern I concluded in 1981. Final water quality in the
    pattern is discussed in the Ground-Water Impacts section of this
    chapter.
    Pattern II
    Pattern II Mining
    RMEC used a sodium bicarbonate lixiviant for this pattern which was
    a short distance from Pattern I. The carbonate pilot plant operated at
    an average injection rate of 40 gpm. After the lixiviant circulated
    through the ore-bearing strata and was pumped back to the surface, it
    passed ion exchange columns for uranium recovery. The lixiviant was
    then fortified with carbonate ion by the addition of solid sodium
    carbonate at a rate of up to 70 pounds per hour, and carbon dioxide gas
    was sparged into the lixiviant to maintain a pH of 7.5. The solution
    then flowed to the well field surge tank where, prior to reinjection,
    oxidant was added and solution pH was adjusted with gaseous CO^ to the
    pH of the ground water.
    Pattern II Restoration
    Restoration of the pattern was accomplished by circulating the
    ground water through a reverse osmosis (R.O.) system. The contaminated
    water entered the R.O. system where it was separated into two streams:
    a clean product water (permeate), and a concentrated brine stream
    containing salts and radionuclides. Permeate was reinjected into the
    well field and the brine discharged to the synthetical 1y-1ined
    203
    [5-134]
    

    -------
    evaporation pond. The cycling of water through the aquifer and R.O.
    system continued until the production water quality stabilized within
    the background water-quality use category range. Restoration of Pattern
    II proceeded uneventfully and was successful in returning the
    post-mining ground water to background quality or better.
    Past and Present Ground-Water Impacts
    Pattern I employed a sulfuric acid-based 1ixiviant, and trouble was
    experienced not only with restoration but also with the uranium leaching
    operations. Uranium was never successful mined from Pattern I, due to a
    succession of problems including well plugging and failure to mobilize
    sufficient uranium for economic recovery.
    Following the abandonment of mining attempts at Reno Creek Pattern
    I, restoration attempts were unsuccessful. The injected acid had
    preferentially adsorbed onto ion exchange sites on clays in the
    formation. As a result, the formation pH remains well below baseline
    levels. The very low pH has led to continued mobilization of uranium,
    radium, vanadium, iron, aluminum, manganese, calcium, magnesium,
    potassium, sulfate, fluoride and chloride in the ground water. The
    permittee was not able to develop any method to remove the acid from the
    ion exchange sites in the formation other than circulating a strongly
    concentrated basic solution of positively-charged cations through the
    Pattern I well field. Injection of such a solution was felt by WDEQ and
    NRC personnel to pose a greater threat to the ground water than allowing
    the ground water to remain unrestored. For this reason, the Reno Ranch
    204
    [5-185]
    

    -------
    operator was allowed to cease ground-water restoration attempts at
    Pattern I, although ground-water monitoring was required for several
    years after the end of restoration attempts. At this time, all
    restoration and monitoring activities have ceased. The ground water in
    Pattern I remains in its contaminated state.
    The baseline ground-water quality in Pattern I did not generally
    meet the standards for Class I or Class II ground waters in Wyoming.
    The principal constituents in the ground water which violated those
    standards were sulfate, total dissolved solids, vanadium, and especially
    radium. The concentrations of these constituents have all been
    dramatically increased in the unrestored aquifer, and other constituents
    have also been elevated beyond the standards for ground-water Classes I
    and II. Table 7B-4 illustrates the quality of water in Pattern I wells
    as of August 1982, almost 3 years after mining ended.
    Ground water from this aquifer is not used in the immediate area
    for any purpose, though there are stock wells which may withdraw water
    from the aquifer within a few miles of Pattern I. At this time the
    contamination of the Pattern I aquifer in the immediate vicinity of the
    Reno Ranch site is not having any effect on the public health or
    welfare.
    Prediction of Future Ground-Water Imoacts
    Over a long period ot time, sufficiently large quantities of the
    highly buffered aquifer water will move through the well fiela and
    neutralize the acid remaining on the formation's ion exchange sites. As
    205
    [5-136]
    

    -------
    Table 7B-4. Post Active (August 27, 1982) Restoration Analytical
    Results for RMEC, Reno Ranch Compliance Wells.
    Wei Is
    Production	Monitor
    Parameter
    P-l
    P-2
    M-l
    M-2
    M-3
    M-4
    PH
    4.6
    4.5
    R
    R
    R
    R
    Conductivi ty
    2800
    3000
    1700
    1800
    R
    2000
    Bicarbonate
    R
    R
    130
    R
    R
    R
    Carbonate
    R
    R
    R
    R
    R
    R
    A1 kali ni ty
    
    
    
    
    
    
    (CaC03 eq)
    R
    R
    110
    R
    R
    R
    Calcium
    280
    280
    R
    R
    120
    130
    Chiori de
    45
    66
    R
    R
    R
    R
    Magnesi um
    66
    73
    R
    R
    R
    R
    Potassium
    33
    47
    R
    R
    R
    R
    Sodium
    R
    R
    230
    R
    R
    R
    Sulfate
    1600
    1800
    R
    R
    R
    R
    TDS
    2400
    2500
    R
    R
    R
    R
    Juminum
    5.1
    5.3
    3.3
    R
    2.4-
    1.5
    Arseni c
    R
    R
    R
    R
    R
    R
    Barium
    . 2*
    .2*
    .2*
    . 2*
    .2*
    . 2*
    Boron
    R
    R
    R
    R
    R
    R
    Cadmi um
    R
    R
    R
    R
    R
    R
    Chromi um
    R
    R
    R
    R
    R
    R
    Copper
    R
    R
    R
    R
    R
    R
    F1 uon de
    .6
    .5
    R
    R
    R
    R
    Iron
    35
    42
    2.4
    R
    1.3
    .8
    Lead
    R
    R
    R
    R
    R
    .023
    Manganese
    1.1
    1.2
    R
    R
    R
    .080
    Mercury
    R
    R
    R
    R
    .0002
    R
    Molybdenum
    R
    R
    R
    R
    R
    R
    Nickel
    .06
    .05
    .03
    R
    .03
    .02
    Selenium
    R
    R
    R
    R
    R
    R
    Vanadi um
    .79
    R
    R
    R
    R
    R
    Zinc
    R
    R
    R
    R
    R
    R
    Urani um
    1.2
    R
    R
    R
    R
    R
    Radium
    860
    1200
    R
    R
    R
    R
    All units mg/1 except pH (std units), conductivity (umhos/cm) and radium (pCi/1).
    ND Not detectable
    R Restored to or below baseline levels
    Detection limit to high to determine restoration success
    206
    [5-137]
    

    -------
    a result, the various cationic and anionic species in solution will
    reprecipitate and the aquifer will gradually approach its background
    quality. This type of "natural" restoration would not prevent harm to
    any nearby user of the ground water. At Reno Ranch, however, there is
    no such user.
    Although the aquifer affected by attempted in situ mining of
    Pattern I has not been restored to its baseline condition, the Reno
    Ranch facility site is being abandoned. The chemical contaminants
    injected and mobilized in Pattern I will therefore move away from the
    project area at a rate approximating the local ground-water velocity
    (3.1 feet per year). Low ground-water pH and elevated concentrations of
    vanadium, radium, uranium and the other contaminants will coincide with
    this movement. This contamination will be attenuated as the "slug" of
    contaminated water moves into previously uncontaminated areas of the
    aquifer, however. Hydrogen ions in the contaminated ground water will
    eventually be neutralized by contact with basic (calcium bearing)
    formation minerals, raising the pH. Elevated vanadium and radium
    concentrations, which are a result of the lowered aquifer pH, will
    subsequently be reduced as the vanadium and radium ions in solution are
    adsorbed on ion exchange sites in the formation. Likewise, uranium will
    reprecipitate in the formation and be deposited along a new "roll front"
    as the pH of the affected ground water is returned to normal.
    The distance which these contaminants would move before being
    reduced to background concentrations will vary, depending upon a number
    of factors involving the aquifer geochemistry and interaction among the
    contaminants. Use of a model to predict this information for all of the
    207
    [5-188]
    

    -------
    contaminants of concern at Reno Ranch would be a complex undertaking,
    and is beyond the scope of this study. It appears, however, that the
    chemical contaminants in the Pattern I ground-water will not migrate to
    any location where ground water from the affected aquifer is presently
    being withdrawn for use. This statement is based upon the absence of
    any nearby (within several miles) wells appropriating water from this
    aquifer, the known high background levels of radium in the water, the
    limited areal extent of the Pattern I well field, and the high buffering
    capacity of the formation minerals. This capacity was demonstrated by
    the failure of mining within Pattern I, and will result in the
    attenuation of chemical contamination of the aquifer within a relatively
    short distance of the project site.
    Recommendations for Mitigation of Existing Ground-Water Pollution
    At the present time, it appears that little can be safely and
    practically done to alleviate the contamination of the ground water
    affected by the Pattern I well field at the Reno Ranch site. The
    minerals in the affected aquifer have been altered, more or less
    permanently, by the attempted acid leaching of uranium.
    Prevention of Ground-Water Pollution at Similar Sites
    In order to prevent a recurrence of the problems encountered with
    restoration of Pattern I, close attention must be paid to aquifer
    geochemistry when planning and permitting similar facilities.
    Incompatibility between formation minerals and the mining 1ixiviant was
    the only apparent reason for the failure of restoration at this site.
    208
    [5-189]
    

    -------
    The experiment operator was able to restore the nearby Pattern II ground
    water without exceptional difficulty. As far as may be determined from
    the WDEQ files, the operator also evidenced some willingness to attempt
    restoration of Pattern I using untried techniques which would probably
    have been unusually expensive for an experiment of this size.
    Original use of acid 1ixiviant at Reno Ranch appears to have been
    based solely upon the operator's successful use of acid in a different
    location. Use of an acid 1ixiviant, and subsequent restoration
    problems, could have been avoided if personnel of either RMEC or WDEQ
    had been aware of the disastrous consequences of such use in an aquifer
    containing large amounts of calcite. In the future, regulatory
    personnel should be encouraged to make use of such experiences. WDEQ
    personnel should not be hesitant to advise and, if necessary, direct
    permit applicants in the use of appropriate lixiviants (and techniques)
    in the mining phase of projects such as Reno Ranch. As a result of the
    failure of the Pattern I project and studies of aquifer geochemistry
    elsewhere in areas of Wyoming containing uranium ore, WDEQ has barred
    further use of sulfuric acid lixiviants for uranium in situ leaching
    projects.
    209
    [5-190]
    

    -------
    CHAPTER 7C
    BILL SMITH PROJECT - KERR-MCGEE NUCLEAR COMPANY
    Introduction
    The Kerr-McGee Nuclear Company's (KMNC) Bill Smith Project was
    selected as one of the in situ uranium leaching projects to be assessed
    because 1) it was one of two sites identified in the state as an
    experiment in solution mining in a conventional underground uranium mine
    (stopes leaching); and 2) adequate data appeared to be available.
    However, the quality of data from the Bill Smith Project files was less
    than anticipated and information from the second such project has been
    utilized. The second project, the Bill Smith 6001 Project, was located
    west of and directly adjacent to the Bill Smith Project. The
    experiments were similar in procedures and methods so that data and
    results from both projects can be combined.
    Site Hydroqeoloqy
    The Bill Smith Project is located in Section 36, T36N, R74W,
    Converse County, about 40 miles northeast of Casper, Wyoming. The
    Wasatch Formation of Eocene Age out crops in the in situ experiment area
    (Sharp, et al., 1954). It consists of about 500 feet of interbedded
    sandy siltstones and shale separating relatively clean sandstones in
    which ground water occurs under unconfined water-table conditions
    (Hodson, et al., 1973). The uranium-bearing sandstone in the Bill Smith
    %
    Mine is designated by Kerr-McGee as the "0" sand of the Fort Union
    210
    [5-
    

    -------
    Formation, and occurs at an approximate depth of 850 feet. The "P"
    shale, which separates the overlying "Q" sand from the "0" sand, is
    about 60 feet thick and functions as an aquitard between the water-table
    aquifer system and an artesian aquifer system existing in the "0" sand.
    The "0" sand is made up of the 0-1, 0-2, 0-3, and 0-4 sand segments in
    the test area. The shale stringers between the "0" sand segments in the
    project area are limited in areal extent and are not continuous into
    other areas. Therefore, the total "0" sand, made up of the four
    segments in this local area, is considered a single aquifer unit (Permit
    4 RD). The "N" shale is found below the "0" sand, and separates it from
    the underlying "M" sand which is about 50 feet thick. A site
    cross-section (Figure 7C-1) shows the relationships of the stratigraphy
    described above.
    Aquifers in the test area generally yield 5 to 20 gpm but some
    wells yield in excess of 100 gpm (Hodson, 1973). The regional ground
    water flow in the Fort Union Formation is northeast under normal
    conditions. However, at the test site and areas near the mine, the
    water movement is into the mine workings.
    Two pumping wells, TW-1 and TW-2, and 10 observation wells were
    constructed specifically for aquifer testing near the mine. Figure 7C-2
    is a map of the mine area and the test well locations.
    The TW-2 well was pumped for a 10-day period in July 1975 at an
    average rate of 550 gpm. The TW-1 well was pumped for a 6-day period
    staring September 29, 1975 at 425 gpm. Based on an analysis of drawdown
    and recovery data, the following conclusions were drawn (Permit 4 RD):
    211
    [5-192]
    

    -------
    Figure 7C-1. Geologic Cross-Section Through Kerr-McGee Bill Smith Project Site (from WDEQ Files).
    oi-J0S
    ro
    •—»
    ro
    .22	or
    trmrnTi
    
    
    
    .....] v !. ! ... "
    7.'.V.V.V.V.*.*. ...
    A-y.-y.'
    . "*"• ¦« " * 1. •* .
    • •: * i ^ ' « "V- 4 ? -• •** "
    I •, ^ _ • • 4 ,• ^
    r-n aycpj
    v-:Vxi:
    "4" . '»^
    
    x^iiyxSiv^v;1::;
    :f*'VK5;roWHRkjx
    ¦i-14 *rTi,n7vv^np.ir r?
    !vX\vXvXvIv. j <.
    
    P>7T.Y.T^iTrrn~ • . r\-*-r«r»-.T.-.
    'A7• "A/:t' "i'-1
    * o-j \AH0#"1 '.
    •x jo	vX-r* ::*x wj v
    * .. n * . *
    
    -. ¦ f - • •¦• • - 7 ; - . h - NO
    i < ¦ w . -» •« » i, .	;	, . • ¦* ^ ^ . ¦« ^ • . •« . *i «{ • \ , 1 , • ¦; ^' i • ¦< • <« _ ¦» , « ••X-li I T a
    ; •£*»«tje<«d!>¦&¦&?:i¥jt~-*»«	• < ;?«?.•• 'J*0,:;f-f;^
    0100
    
    LEGEND
    016O OOlPT
    (ll	woii dcvcmmioh
    (2) r(toPOJ/0 1mJ«lIon Wfit.
    C Ofoo pgiFT
    f-SCtTl»M L0C«1'OM
    (2) ^AHOilOMt
    EO trtA*-t
    13 OHt tout
    N \ 1 I
    . \ I I I /
    N * l» /
    I II / .'
    °v'
    u
    (2) L0M4MOIC fAtf D«ill«0
    fhon uNDCuflOOuitO D*l»I
    Cfliio v
    -------
    N
    ro
    i—'
    6v>V-5
    o
    Fl 74 W.
    26
    35
    25 o
    vo-
    36 TW ~ 2
    ows - 3
    o
    O'M
    o
    TW-1
    ~ 3i J
    O Vent
    ./	4'f,/ *//!< />//.,
    OI-I 01-2
    © - ®
    I Smith Mine
    , Hole
    25
    36
    30
    T.
    36
    N.
    1000
    '
    2000
    3000 FEET
    	i
    JZXPlAhJYn Oa1
    o Test well
    o Paired monitor veil
    ©	Injection
    Well
    ~
    License Area
    cn
    l
    <0
    FIGURE 7C-2-MAP OF BILL SMITH MINE AREA AND TEST WELL LOCATIONS
    (from WnCQ Files)
    Revised March 6, 1990
    

    -------
    1.	The average transmissivity of the artesian aquifer system
    between wells OWD-3 and OWD-5 is about 1000 ft^/day; the
    -4
    average storage coefficient is about 3 x 10 .
    2.	Transmissivity in the vicinity of well TW-1 is about 735
    ft^/day and in the vicinity of well OWD-2 is less than 670
    2	-4
    ft /day; the storage coefficient is about 4 x 10 .
    3.	Pumping of wells TW-1 and TW-2 created a cone of pressure
    relief extending to more than 10,000 feet from the wells
    during the 6- and 10-day pumping periods.
    4.	Pumping of wells TW-1 and TW-2 induced water-table conditions
    to occur in the immediate vicinity of each well as the
    hydrostatic head was lowered below the top of the "0" sand.
    5.	The hydrostatic head in the water-table aquifer overlying the
    "P" shale is higher in elevation than the head in the
    underlying "0" and "M" sands; consequently, there is a
    hydraulic gradient downward through the "P" shale. Pumping of
    wells TW-1 and TW-2 did not cause noticeable changes in the
    water level in observation wells tapping the water-table
    aquifer; therefore, there was no apparent increase in the rate
    of water movement through the "P" shale during the pumping
    period (Permit 4 RD).
    The results of the pump tests conducted in the Fort Union Formation
    aquifers are found in Table 7C-1. Figure 7C-3 is a map of the
    potentiometric surface as reported to the DEQ on 1-21-80.
    214
    [5-195]
    

    -------
    Table 7C-1. Properties of the Principal Fort Union Aquifer, Bill Smith Project Site (from WDEQ Files).
    Aquifer Transmissivity
    TW-1	TW-2	Estimated	Storage
    Kerr-McGee Pump Test Pump Test Permeability Coefficient
    Mell Mo. Location (gpd/ft.) {gpd/ft.) (gpd/ft ) (dimsnsionless)
    	 (T-R-Sec. i 1)
    TW-l
    36-74-25dd
    3400
    --
    17
    --
    TW-2
    36-74-25cc
    --
    6300
    27
    
    OWS-1
    36-74-25dcd
    —
    —
    —
    
    OWD-1
    36-74-25dcd2
    5300
    7000
    22
    0.00035
    0WS-2
    36-74-25ddb
    
    --
    	
    
    0W0-2
    36-74-25ddb2
    4700
    8300
    28
    0.00031
    OWS-3
    36-74-25cdd
    —
    —
    	
    
    0W0-3
    36-74-25cdd2
    7300
    7700
    27
    0.00035
    O'VS-4
    36-74-25ccc
    --
    
    	
    
    OVID-4
    36-74-25ccc2
    9500
    7500
    23
    0.00015
    OWS-5
    3G-74-26dda
    --
    --
    	
    
    OWD-5
    36-74-26dda2
    8700
    7700
    25
    0.00023
    in
    I
    <0
    o>
    

    -------
    Fiqure 7C-3.
    general test AQUIFER PIEZOMETRIC .CONTOURS*1^
    LICENSE AREA AND ADJACENT LANDS
    kerr-mcgee bill smith project
    CONVERSE COUNTY WYOMING
    (from Permit 4RD)
    R74W	R7CUV
    LICENSE AREA
    	 LIMITS OF ADJACENT LAUDS
    E	['ILL SMITH MINE SHAFT
    — 5000 — EXPECTED 'O* SAND PIEZOMETRIC SURFACE — FEET ASOVE *n S L
    (1) THE CONTOURS ARE BASED ON VERY U.M1TEO DATA BUT ARE CELIEVED
    REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE TEST SITE.
    216
    [5-197]
    

    -------
    Ground Mater Quality
    Baseline water quality parameters over a 4-year period are
    presented in Tables 7C-2 and 7C-3. Table 7C-2 presents 1977 data from
    test wells 1 and 2 and from mine discharge water in 1979. It also gives
    the quality of water from the 0300 and 0500 drifts in the mine in 1980
    from the Bill Smith Project. Table 7C-3 presents water quality data
    from the Bill Smith 6001 Area Project in the adjacent quarter section.
    Water quality data from 1980 from the 0600 drift discharge and from the
    6001 area monitor well in August, 1981 is given. The baseline qualities
    are marginal for Class I domestic uses because of slightly high
    concentrations of sulfate (180-304 mg/L) and total dissolved solids
    (TDS) (487-620 mg/L). The concentrations for sulfate exceed standards
    for agriculture use but are within those for livestock use. TDS values
    are within standards for agriculture and livestock use. However, radium
    226 exceeds limits for any ground-water use classification. The pCi/L
    values range from 51.7 to 159 in discharge water from mine drifts and
    from 18.0 to 28.7 in test wells.
    Ground Water Use
    Table 7C-4 presents an inventory of all wells in the KMNC area and
    adjoining lands of the Bill Smith Project and 6001 Project areas. These
    include wells used in the 2 pump tests conducted prior to the
    experimental lixiviant injection and wells constructed for all other
    uses.
    Three well permits are held in the area within about 1.5 miles
    radius of the stopes leaching experimental areas (Figure 7C-4). One of
    217
    [5-198]
    

    -------
    Table 7C-2. Baseline Ground Water Quality Parameters, Kerr-McGee
    Bill Smith Project (from WOEQ Files).
    
    0300 Drift Discharge
    0500 Drift Discharge
    
    8/5/80
    8/5/80
    Aluminum1
    .21
    .22
    Arsenic
    .009
    .006
    Barium
    .03
    .04
    Boron
    .4
    .3
    Bicarbonate
    160
    137
    Carbonate
    <5
    <5
    Cadmium
    <.01
    <.01
    Calcium
    110
    76
    Chloride
    <5
    <5
    Chromium
    <.001
    <.001
    Copper
    <.001
    <.001
    Fluoride
    .3
    . 3
    Iron
    .014
    .020
    Lead
    .001
    .001
    Manganese
    <.001
    <.001
    Magnesium
    31
    32
    Mercury
    <.001
    <.001
    Molybdenum
    .002
    . 003
    Nickel
    .006
    .016
    Nitrates ( As N)
    .40
    1.8
    Potassium
    13
    9
    Selenium
    .018
    .016
    Silver
    <.002
    <.002
    Sodium
    28
    28
    Sulphate
    304
    264
    Zinc
    .015
    .021
    Uranium
    .40
    . 10
    Vanadium
    .009
    <. 0Q3
    Total Dissolved
    620
    * 5C7
    Solids
    
    682
    Conductivity
    787
    (umhos)
    
    68.6
    Ra-226 (pCifI)
    73.5
    pH (std. units)
    7. 8
    8.0
    'All units are mg/1 unless noted otherwise.
    218
    [5-199]
    

    -------
    Table 7C-2. Baseline Ground Water Quality Parameters, Kerr-McGee
    Bill Smith Project (from WDEQ Files) (cont'd).
    Test Well I Test Well 2 Bill Smith Mine Disch
    (1977 ER) 2 (1977 ER)	9/25/79 10/17/79
    Aluminum1
    
    .002
    .001
    .026
    .028
    Arsenic
    
    .001
    <.001
    .007
    .007
    Barium
    
    -
    -
    .026
    .2
    Boron
    
    .35
    .30
    .5
    .2
    Bicarbonate
    
    230
    220
    19 7
    179
    Carbonate
    
    —
    —
    <5-
    10
    Cadmium
    
    -
    -
    <.001
    <.001
    Calcium
    
    81
    83
    84
    91
    Chloride
    
    <5
    <5
    3. 3
    <5
    Chromium
    
    .001
    <.001
    <.001
    <.001
    Copper
    
    .003
    .002
    .001
    <.001
    Fluoride
    
    -
    -
    .34
    .28
    Iron
    
    .98
    1.0
    -001
    .001
    Lead
    
    -
    -
    <.001
    <.001
    Manganese
    
    .051
    .054
    .002
    .009
    Magnesium
    
    25
    23
    32
    29
    Mercury
    
    -
    -
    <.001
    <.001
    Molybdeum
    
    -
    -
    .006
    .002
    Nitrates (As N
    .)
    O
    •
    V
    A
    •
    O
    . 1
    . 3
    Selenium
    
    —
    —
    .006
    <.001
    Silver
    
    —
    —
    <.001
    <.001
    Socium
    
    30
    29
    26
    27
    Sulpha te
    
    ISO
    210
    222
    257
    Zinc
    
    .003
    .003
    .60
    . 020
    Urarium
    
    .014
    .016
    . 35
    .40
    Total Disolved
    Solids
    -
    -
    490
    514
    Radium 22 6 pCi/1
    22.5
    28.7
    I
    CO
    51.
    pH - Standard ¦
    units
    7.2
    7.5
    CPS
    •
    7.
    (1)	All units are mg/1 except where listed otherwise.
    (2)	Environmental report to NRC on the Kerr-"cC-ee mill - July, 1977
    219
    [5-200]
    

    -------
    Table 7C-3.
    Baseline Ground Water Quality Parameters. Bill Smith 6001
    Area Project (from WDEQ Files).
    6001 Area Monitor Well
    
    
    7/17/81
    7/22/81
    7/27/S17/27/31
    7/31/81
    Aluminum *
    .03
    .OS
    <.05W <.5
    <.05
    Arsenic
    .004
    .006
    <.002 <.005
    <.002
    Barium
    .08
    .09
    <.02 <.2
    <.02
    Boron
    <.1
    .15
    < 1 .4
    < 1
    Bicarbonate
    204
    203
    210 175
    205
    Carbonate
    ND^
    ND
    ND m
    ND
    Cadmium
    <.005
    <.005
    <.005 <.005
    <.005
    Calciirt
    110
    110
    105 101
    107
    Chloride
    3
    2
    4 3
    5
    Chromium
    <.01
    <.01
    <.01 <.01
    <.01
    Coppe r
    <.01
    <.01
    <.01 <.01
    <.01
    FluorlJo
    .5
    .5
    .45 .5
    .6
    Iron
    .04
    .02
    <.05 .45
    .03
    Lead
    <.05
    <.05
    <.05 <.05
    <.03
    Manganese
    .02
    .02
    .03 .03
    .03
    Magnesium
    33
    33
    30 26
    32
    Mercury
    <.001
    <.001
    <.001 <.001
    <.001
    Molybdenum
    .006
    .005
    <.05 .008
    <.05
    Nickel
    <.01
    <.01
    <.01 .02
    <.01
    Nitrates (As N)
    < 1
    < 1
    .47 < 1
    .44
    Potassium
    10
    9
    12 8
    12
    Selenium
    .005
    .003
    <.005 <.005
    <.005
    Silver
    <.001
    <.Q01
    ..
    
    Sodium
    30
    29
    35 29
    55
    Sulphate
    294
    290
    231 252
    221
    Zinc
    .61
    .73
    .93 .36
    .9S
    Uranium
    .002
    .005
    .018 .016
    .017
    Vanadium
    <.05
    <.05
    <.05 <.05
    <.05
    Total Dissolved
    582
    569
    519 542
    511
    Solids
    
    
    
    
    Conductivity
    1274
    1290
    10S5 1205
    1099
    (umbos)
    
    
    
    
    Ha-226 (pCi/
    18
    19
    21 IS
    23
    pr( (std. units)
    7.6
    7.5
    7.8 7.6
    7.9
    (lj All unLts are mgA unle
    ss noted
    otherwise
    
    (2) "ho different laborator
    u ?.
    
    
    (5) Not detected at level indicated
    ;is less th.in
    
    (I) NO = Not dc
    tec red.
    
    
    
    220
    [5-201]
    

    -------
    Table 7C-3. Baseline Ground Water Quality Parameters, Bill Smith 6001
    Area Project (from WDEQ Files)(cont'd).
    ORIFT 0600 DISCHARGE
    
    10/22/80
    10/23/80
    10/30/80
    Aluminum *
    <.05
    <.05
    <.05
    Arsenic
    <.002
    <.002
    <.002
    Barium
    <.02
    <.02
    <.02
    Boron
    <1
    <1
    <1
    Bicarbonate
    200
    205
    205
    Carbonate
    0
    0
    0
    Cadmium
    <. 1
    <.1
    <. 1
    Calcium
    83
    95
    95
    Chloride
    7
    4
    4
    Chromium
    <.01
    <.01
    <.01
    Copper
    t—I
    O
    V
    <•01
    <.01
    Fluoride
    0.44
    0.43
    0.44
    Iron
    .08
    .08
    .09
    Lead
    <.05
    <.05
    <.05
    Manganese
    <.01
    <.01
    <.01
    Magnes i urn
    29
    25
    25
    Mercury
    <.001
    <.001
    <.001
    Molybdenum
    <.05
    <.05
    <.05
    Nickel
    <.01
    <.01
    <.01
    nitrates (As N)
    0.71
    0.58
    0.58
    Potassium
    10
    10
    10
    Selenium
    <.002
    <.002
    <.002
    SiIver
    <.01
    <.01
    <.01
    Sod i urn
    32
    32
    32
    Sulphate
    202
    241
    260
    Zinc
    <.05
    <.05
    < .05
    Uranium
    . 322
    .275
    .299
    Vanadium
    < .05
    < .05
    <.05
    Total Dissolved
    487
    532
    548
    Sol ids
    
    
    
    Conduct!v i ty
    7440
    7600
    7390
    (umhos)
    
    
    
    Ra-226 (pCi/2)
    125
    159
    155
    pH (std. units)
    7.46
    7.41
    7.48
    *A11 units are mg/J. unless noted otherwise.
    Rcvincd 12/22
    221
    [5-202]
    

    -------
    Table 7C-4. Water Well Permits Within About 1.5 Miles of the Bill
    Smith/Bill Smith 6001 Project Areas.
    Permit	Owner/	Water
    Number Location, S, T, R	Well Name Depth Use Level
    (feet)	(feet)
    6898 NENE 30, 36N, 73W W. Vollman	32 Stock
    Vollman No. 7
    6984 SWNE 30 36N, 73W W. Vollman	100 Stock 85
    Vollman No. 2
    70183 NWSW 30, 36N, 73W Sequoyah	900 Monitor --
    0M-30-376
    222
    [5-203]
    

    -------
    
    R. 74 W.
    R. 73 W.
    
    
    
    
    6898#
    
    
    
    
    6984 ^
    
    
    26
    25
    30
    
    
    
    
    •70183
    
    
    BILL SMITH
    
    ¦ bill SMITH
    
    
    6001 ¦
    ^ 36
    PROJECT
    
    
    35
    
    3/
    
    T. 36 N
    
    
    
    
    T. 35 N.
    
    
    
    
    
    2
    I
    6
    
    N
    EXPLANATION
    ^ 6984 WELL LOCATION ANO
    PERMIT NUMBER
    
    0	1 Mild
    	1	i	1
    SCALE
    FIGURE 7C-4- LOCATIONS OF PERMITTEO WATER WELLS
    NEAR THE BILL SMITH PROJECT AREA
    223
    [5-204]
    

    -------
    these is for monitoring, and no use is made of the water. The other two
    are for shallow wells for stock watering (see Table 7C-4) (Wyoming State
    Engineer). The stock wells obtain water from the unconfined ground
    water in the colluvium and upper Wasatch Formation strata, neither of
    which is connected to the confined aquifer containing the uranium ore.
    Description of Facilities
    The Bill Smith Project is located on a 40 acre tract in the NWi NEi
    of section 36, T36N, R74W, Converse County. The facilities occupy only
    0.5 acres of the permit area. Figure 7C-2, presented previously, shows
    the surface well pattern for the leaching experiment. The injection
    wells were drilled with a small rotary drilling unit using a bentonite
    additive in native drilling mud. The wells were drilled to the top of
    the specified completion interval, and four inch fiberglass casing was
    run and cemented in place. After the cement had set, the wells were
    deepened and completed open hole with an inside gravel pack. The wells
    are dry to the top of the gravel pack due to the longhole dewatering in
    the test area; therefore, no well development was employed. Figure 7C-5
    shows two types of well completions used in the Bill Smith and Bill
    Smith 6001 stopes leaching experiments. Injection wells underwent
    mechanical integrity testing prior to beginning of leaching operations.
    Drift surveys indicated that wells were drilled fairly straight with a
    maximum deviation of 4.63 feet in well M4.
    224
    [5-205]
    

    -------
    Figure 7C-5.
    TYPICAL WELL COMPLETIONS
    Tir
    IS?'
    €
    -V
    ¦CEMENT-
    *	DRILL HOLE-
    
    **.
    '4 ¦
    *•
    r
    •4*
    4 *"
    *••*
    Vv
    DRILLING MUD
    OR CEMENT-
    - CAS i N G ~
    , II
    4 to 6
    ¦CEMENT-
    ¦4.9.
    V*
    SHALE
    CEMENT BASKET-
    v;
    r.<
    - ~
    :y
    V.
    '•«:
    v.
    /.T;
    V.?
    t .
    <*:*
    7*;:
    .
    r *
    •
    . v
    r..
    SLOTTEO
    LINER
    ORE SAND
    5'
    200-550
    200r- 251
    ZS>-50'
    I
    I5'-3Q'
    SHALE
    25'- SO'
    OPEN.. HOLE
    COMPLETION
    SLOTTED LINER
    COMPLETION
    225
    [5-206]
    

    -------
    Operation History
    The leaching experiment was preceeded by ground water sampling
    designed to obtain baseline water characteristics for comparison with
    the same parameters during the experiment and more importantly, during
    aquifer restoration after the project was completed. The Bill Smith
    Project application was presented to the DEQ and permit 4 RD was granted
    in 1980. The uranium production zone is indicated on the cross-section
    of Figure 7C-1 with the "ore zone symbol". The relative locations of
    the underground haulage drifts are also indicated on the cross-section
    and are labelled 0300, 0100, and 0500. The only underground workings in
    the project area are the haulage drifts. The injection wells, 01-1 and
    01-2, are shown on the cross-section.
    The vertical limits in the test area are the underlying "N" shale
    and the overlying shale stringers in the respective areas. The lateral
    movement of the leach solution was expected to be limited to within 25
    feet of the injection wells by the large number of cased longholes,
    drilled up from the mine drifts in the area. The fluid flow paths from
    the injection wells to the adjacent cased longholes are indicated on the
    attached cross-section (Figure 7C-1). Two injection wells were drilled,
    cased, and cemented to total depths of about 850 feet, terminating in
    the "0" sand above the Bill Smith mine workings. Longholes were drilled
    and cased upward from the mine workings into the "0" sand.
    Mine water with hydrogen peroxide or oxygen, added to a
    concentration of 0.5 g/L, and mine water with sodium
    carbonate/bicarbonate concentration of up to 2 g/L and the above
    oxidants, were used a leach solutions in the two injection wells. This
    225
    [5-207]
    

    -------
    Table 7C-5. Baseline vs. Post Test Water Quality, Kerr-McGee Bill
    Smith Project (from WDEQ Files).
    0300 Drift Discharge	0500 Drift Discharge
    
    High
    Baseline
    Value
    8/10/32
    9/03/82
    High
    Baseline
    Value
    8/10/82
    9/03/8
    Alutni nurn^
    .21
    <.05
    <.05
    .22
    <.05
    <.05
    Arsenic
    .009
    <.002
    <.002
    .006
    <.002
    <..0C
    Barium
    .20
    <.02
    <.02
    .22
    <.02
    <.02
    Boron
    .5
    <.1
    .3
    .5
    <.1
    <.1
    Bicarbonate
    213
    215
    215
    223
    210
    195
    Carbonate
    <5
    M02
    NO
    <5.0
    Nf)
    MD
    Cadmi um
    < .01
    <.01
    <.01
    <.01
    <.01
    <.01
    Ca1c ium
    110
    107
    122
    110
    102
    123
    Chioride
    <5
    6
    5
    <5
    7
    5
    Chromium
    .001
    <.01
    <.01
    .005
    <.01
    < .0'
    Copper
    .002
    <.01
    <.01
    .001
    <.01
    <.01
    Fluoride
    .3
    .38
    .34
    .3
    .40
    ,3c
    Iron
    .014
    <.05
    <.05
    .020
    <.05
    <. 0E
    Lead
    .001
    <.05
    <.05
    .001
    < .05
    < .0:
    Manganese
    .008
    .02
    .02
    .020
    .02
    .0:
    Magnes lurn
    31
    28
    23
    34
    23
    11
    Mercury
    <.001
    <.001
    <.001
    <.001
    <.001
    < .oc
    Molybdenum
    .005
    <.05
    <.05
    .007
    <.05
    < .C:
    Nickel
    <.01
    <.01
    <.01
    .016
    <.01
    <.0",
    filtrates
    .40
    2.2
    1.7
    1.8 .
    2.0
    1 .6
    Potassium
    13
    11
    11
    9
    11
    11
    Selenium
    .018
    <.002
    < .002
    .016
    .OOP.
    .oc
    Silver
    <.002
    <.01
    <.01
    <.002
    <.01
    .02
    Sodium
    28
    35
    34
    29
    36
    35
    Sulphate
    304
    312
    280
    278
    245
    248
    Zinc
    .015
    .018
    <.005
    .021
    .016
    .01
    Uranium
    .40
    1.48
    .37
    .10
    .86
    . 6C
    Vanadium
    <.01
    <.05
    <.05
    <.01
    <.05
    < .0:
    Total Dissolved Solids
    620
    605
    580
    556
    572
    529
    Conductivity (umhos)
    787
    760
    740
    682
    765
    700
    Ra-226 (pCi/l
    89.7
    146.3
    *
    68.6
    43.4
    ~
    pH (std. units)
    7.8
    8.0
    8.2
    8.0
    >
    8.0
    8.2
    1	AH units aro mcj/1 uri1e;:c. notocl otherwise.
    2
    Hot detected - detection limit 'not reported.
    225	[5-203]
    

    -------
    oxidizing lixiviant permeated the uranium bearing sands to solubilize
    the uranium and drained into the mine workings principally through the
    cased longholes. During chemical injection, well head pressure for the
    injection wells was limited to 50 psi surface pressure. Leach solution
    injection rates of less than 25 gpm were used for a period of about 60
    days.
    Samples were taken underground as the injected water entered the
    mine and the samples were analyzed to determine if uranium was
    solubilized. All produced water was pumped to the surface, treated in
    existing facilities, and discharged to the surface. The Bill Smith
    Project and the Bill Smith 6001 in situ stopes leaching experiments were
    completed in 1982.
    Past and Present Ground-Mater Impacts
    Table 7C-5 compares the baseline and the post-test water qualities
    in samples taken from the 0300 and 0500 drifts in the Bill Smith Project
    (Permit 4RD). Table 7C-6 contains the same comparison from the 0600 and
    6000 drifts in the Bill Smith 6001 area (Permit 8R0). The data
    presented show that the mine waters remained near the background water
    quality levels. Comparisons of the baseline concentrations and the
    sampling results in 1982 show both positive and negative changes over
    the life of the project. Table 7C-7 presents uranium concentrations
    from drift discharge points in both projects. After chemical injection
    was terminated, reduced concentrations were recorded over the following
    2 months. Restoration uranium concentrations were near but above high
    227
    [5-209]
    

    -------
    Table 7C-6. Baseline vs. Post Test Quality Parameters, Bill
    Smith 6001 Area Project (from WDEQ Files).
    0600 Drift Discharge		6000 Drift Discharge
    
    High
    
    
    High
    
    
    
    Baseline
    
    
    Baseline
    
    
    
    Value
    8/10/82
    9/03/82
    Value
    8/10/82
    9/03/8:
    Aluminum
    <.05
    <.05
    <.05
    < .05
    < .05
    < .05
    Arseni c
    <.002
    <.002
    <.002
    .001
    <.002
    < .002
    Barium
    <.02
    <.02
    <.02
    <.02
    < .02
    < .02
    Boron
    <1.0
    <.1
    <.1
    <1.0
    < .1
    .3
    Bicarbonate
    205
    205
    205
    215
    254
    200
    Carbonate
    0
    ND2
    ND
    ND
    ND
    ND
    Cadmium
    <.1
    < .005
    <.005
    <.005
    <.005
    A
    O
    0
    1
    Calcium
    95
    98
    107
    124.0
    161 .0
    115
    Chloride
    7
    7
    6
    6.0
    30.0
    6
    Chromium
    <.01
    <.01
    <.01
    <.01
    <.01
    <.0l
    Copper
    <.01
    <.01
    <.01
    <.01
    <.01
    <.0l
    F1 uoride
    .44
    .43
    .40
    .72
    .44
    .40
    I ron
    .09
    <.05
    <.05
    .09
    <.05
    <.0S
    Lead
    < .05
    <.05
    <.05
    .07
    <.05
    < .05
    Manganese
    <.01
    .02
    .02
    .02
    .06
    .02
    Magnesium
    29
    23
    20
    35
    43
    18
    P.e rcury
    <.001
    <.001
    <.001
    <.001
    <.001
    <.001
    Molybdenum
    <.05
    <.05
    <.05
    <.05
    <.05
    <.05
    Nickel
    <.01
    <.01
    <.01
    <.01
    .03
    <.01
    Nitrates {as N)
    .71
    1.9
    1.7
    .52
    2.0
    1.5
    Potassium
    10
    11
    10
    12
    14
    10
    Seldfiiun
    <.C02
    < .C02
    A
    O
    o
    < .005
    .005
    <.002
    Si 1ver
    <.01
    <.01
    <.01
    -
    <.01
    .02
    Sodium
    32
    36
    32
    34
    54
    32
    Sulphate
    260
    247
    256
    320
    420
    248
    Zinc
    <.05
    .02
    .01
    <.1
    .039
    .01 1
    Urani um
    .32
    1.68
    .50
    .81
    7.19
    .58
    Vanadium
    <.05
    <.05
    <.05
    <.05
    <.05
    <.05
    Total Di ssolved Sol ids
    543
    527
    532
    620
    847
    528
    Conductivity (umhos)
    7600
    765
    685
    1030
    1020
    690
    Ra-226 (pCi/1}
    159.0
    113
    *
    39.0
    31.1
    *
    pH (std. units)
    7.5
    8.0
    8.1
    8.1 *
    8.0
    8.1
    ^All units are mg/1 unless noted otherwise.
    ?
    Mot detected - detection limil not i i-por Led .
    'Results not yet available.
    227
    [5-210]
    

    -------
    Table 7C-7. Uranium Concentrations Underground Monitoring Points,
    Bill Smith Project (from WDEQ Files).
    
    
    Uranium - mg/1
    
    
    0300
    0500
    0600
    
    Drift
    Drift
    Drift
    
    Discharqe
    Discharqe
    Discharqe
    July 1, 1982
    6.1
    1.4
    3.7
    July 6, 1982
    6.6
    2.1
    2.7
    July 8, 1982
    5.7
    3.0
    3.2
    July 12, 1982
    4.8
    2.4
    3.5
    July 15, 1982
    2.8
    2.2
    	2.2..C
    July 19, 1932
    4.6
    2.6
    3.2
    July 22, 1932
    2.9
    2.5
    1.9
    July 26, 1982
    2.6
    1.7
    1.6
    July 29, 1982
    1.8
    1.0
    1.2
    August 2, 1982
    1.9
    1.9
    2.0
    August 5, 1932
    2.6
    1.1
    2.4
    August 10, 1932
    1.5
    0.9
    1.7
    August 23, 1982
    1.6
    1.0
    1.7
    September 3, 1982
    0.4
    0.6
    0.5
    September 13, 1932
    0.8(1)
    0.8(1)-
    0.3^
    ^Total flc\; to the station
    from the
    North haulage drift.
    
    (2)
    Total flow to the station
    from the South haulage drift.
    
    (3)chemical injection terminated July 16, 1982
    228
    [5-211]
    

    -------
    baseline values for the 0300 and 0500 drifts in the Bill Smith Project
    and were slightly below high baseline value for the 0600 drift in the
    Bill Smith 6001 Project. No excursions of either injected or pregnant
    1ixiviants were detected in any monitoring wells. The environmental
    impact from those stopes leaching experiments appears to have been
    insignificant. Reasons for this are, 1) the induced gradient of water
    into the mine prevents excursions in any other direction; 2) the
    strength of the lixiviant which was less than normally employed for in
    situ uranium mining; 3) the ability of the pre-existing mine water
    treatment facilities to handle the volume of fluids pumped to the
    surface; 4) the short duration (60 days) of injection; and 5) the small
    size of areas involved.
    The quality of ground water affected by the Bill Smith stopes
    leaching experiment is not known to differ significantly from baseline
    water quality at this time. It is, in fact, probably not accurate to
    discuss ground water affected by the project, since all such water has
    probably been removed from the subsurface as mine pumpage. The large
    quantities of ground water which have moved into this area, and been
    withdrawn as pumpage from the Bill Smith mine, have probably obliterated
    the effects of the experiment upon the aquifer. There are no known
    remaining ground water effects resulting from this experiment.
    Prediction of Future Ground-Water Impacts
    No future impacts of the Bill Smith stopes leaching experiment are
    predicted to occur. The quality of the ground water in the aquifer
    229
    [5-212]
    

    -------
    where the experiment was conducted is not believed to be significantly
    different from background quality; nor are there believed to be any
    additional constituents or contaminants in the aquifer due to the
    experiment. No computer modeling of this situation has therefore been
    performed.
    Lixiviant was injected immediately adjacent to the Bill Smith
    underground mine workings, in quantities which were almost negligible
    when compared with the amount of ground water which had to be removed
    from those workings to keep them from flooding. As a result, recovery of
    the lixiviant with the mine pumpage was assured. Furthermore, the
    injected lixiviant was a relative dilute (compared to those used at
    other in situ uranium projects) sodium carbonate/bicarbonate solution.
    The combination of these factors means that serious or long-terra aquifer
    contamination arising from this project is virtually impossible.
    Prevention of Ground-Water Pollution at Similar Sites
    A combination of favorable conditions prevented the occurrence of
    serious ground-water pollution at the Bill 5mith project. These
    conditions included a very large ground-water gradient away from the
    lixiviant injection location toward a recovery location; relatively weak
    lixiviant solution; and a very small experiment size. It should not be
    assumed that all stopes leaching experiments will have these advantages,
    however. Permit applications for such projects should be scrutinized
    with the same care as applications for any other project intended to
    recover minerals from the subsurface using injection of chemicals.
    230
    [5-213],
    

    -------
    SECTION 5.2.4
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (OR SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    AUTHOR:
    (OR INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION:
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES:
    From Report on Class V Injection
    Well Inventory and Assessment in
    Arizona
    Engineering Enterprises, Inc.
    February, 1987
    Noranda Lakeshore Mines, Inc.
    Casa Grande, Arizona
    USEPA Region IX
    Copper Solution Mining
    The facility uses approximately 419
    injection wells to discribute leach
    fluid (93% sulfuric acid) into a
    block caved zone previously mined
    using conventional methods. Leach
    solution is collected via
    collection drifts, and is pumped to
    the surface where copper is
    extracted at the solvent
    extraction/electrowinning plant.
    In addition to leach operations
    within the block caved zone,
    injection of leachate into un-mined
    portions of the vein is being
    conducted on a pilot basis. The
    goal of this activity is to
    determine if such operations are
    economically feasible.
    It has been reported that more
    fluid is recovered than is actually
    leached through the mine,
    indicating that no leachate is
    allowed to enter the local
    groundwater system. Water wells on
    the nearby Pafago Indian
    Reservation are monitored
    regularly, per request by che
    Bureau of Land Management, for
    Drinking Water Standards.
    [5-214]
    

    -------
    Cover Page
    UNDERGROUM) INJECTION CONTROL PROGRAM INSPECTION REPORT
    FACILITY NAVE: Noranda Lakeshore Mines, Inc.	
    NAME AND PERMIT/EPA ID NUNEER OF INJECTION WELL(S): AZS000000079	
    NATURE OF BUSINESS: Experimental solution mining (copper)	
    DATE(S) OF INSPECTION: 	9/9/86	 TINE: 	
    INSPECTOR(S):
    Name(s): 	M. E. Quillin & Gary Cipriano	
    AffiI iation(s): Engineering Enterprises, Inc.	
    Phone Number(s): (405) 329-8300
    ADDITIONAL PARTICIPANTS:
    Name(s) : 	John Kline & Ernie Ahrens	Bill Bohrer (EPA)	
    AffiI iation(s): Noranda Lakeshore Mines	
    Phone Number(s): (602) 836-2141
    GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS DURING INSPECTION [weather, well(s) operational status,
    ease of entry, general housekeeping etc.3:
    PURPOSE OF INSPECTION: 	To observe injection operations at surface and
    within mine workings
    INSPECTION RESULTS (SUMMARIZED), COMNENTS AND REMARKS:
    All above-ground and mine injection facilities observed and photographed.
    Surface treatment facilities observed.
    I certify that I conducTed the inspection described in The attacned report ana
    that, to the best of my knowledge. This report is accurate.
    Signature of Inspector
    Michael E. Quillin. Geologist. Engineering Enterprises. Inc.
    Name, Title and Affiliation of Inspector
    9/23/86	
    Date of CcmpleTed ReporT
    [5-215]
    

    -------
    UIC INSPECTION REPORT
    SECTION I - GENERAL INFORMATION
    t. Facility Name, Address and Telephone Number:
    Name	Noranda Lakeshore Mines, Inc.	
    Address 	P. 0. Box C-6, Casa Grande, AZ 85222	
    Telephona Number (602) 836-2141
    EPA/Facility ID Number: AZ5000000079
    2.	Facility Contact:
    Name 	John T. Kline	
    Title/AffiI iation Chief Metallurgist, Noranda	
    Telephone Number Same		
    3.	Injection Well(s) Identification:
    Injection Well(s) Identification	
    4.	Location of Injection Well(s):
    Latitude/Longitude 	
    Township/Range, Section TIP, 11$ - R4, 5E Pinal and Pima Counties. AZ
    Street Address 		
    Other		.	
    5.	Name and Address of Legal Contact (if different from above): 	
    6. Types of Permits Issued for this Facility (include permit numbers and names
    of federal, state and local agencies and programs which regulate the
    fac iI i ty): 	NA	
    7. Number and Operational Status of Injection Well(s):
    Well Class/Type	Active Under Abandoned Idle Other
    Construct.
    Class V	 419		 	
    Comments/Remarks (include reasons for abandonment):
    8. Visual Appearance of Injection Wei I(s) (Attach photographs if available):
    Page 1 of 6
    [5-216]
    

    -------
    SECTION I
    1. Well
    wel I
    wel I
    a.
    b.
    UIC INSPECTION REPORT
    I - HYDROGEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENT AND INJECTION WELL INFORMATION
    (s) Construction Details (complete attached diagram for simple Class V
    Cs) and/or provide sketch of wellCs); sketch or provide photograph of
    head): See attached
    e.
    f.
    g-
    h.
    Total Depth
    Casing: 	
    Annular Fluid Type: 	
    Packer Type: 	
    Fluid Seal: Yes No
    Completion Type:
    Perforated Openings
    Screened Openings
    Open Hole 	
    I nh i b itors:
    Depth: 	
    (holes/ft) Depth
    Depth
    Depth
    (sq in/LF) DepTh
    Depth
    Depth
    DIameter:
    
    Grade:
    Wt.
    (#/ft)
    DeDth:
    to
    D i ameter:
    
    Grade:
    Wt.
    (#/ft)
    Depth:
    to
    DIame+er:
    
    Grade:
    Wt.
    (#/ft)
    Depth:
    to
    DIameter:
    
    Grade:
    Wt.
    (#/ft)
    Depth:
    to
    D i ameter:
    
    Grade:
    Wt.
    (#/ft)
    Depth:
    to
    r. Tub i ng:
    
    
    
    
    
    
    D i ameter:
    
    Grade:
    Wt.
    (#/ft)
    Depth:
    to
    d. Cement (also
    indicate drilling mud):
    
    
    Depth
    to
    Grade
    
    Add i t i ves
    
    Depth
    to
    Grade
    
    Additives
    
    Depth
    to
    Grade
    
    Additives
    
    Depth
    to
    Grade
    
    Additives
    
    Depth
    to
    Grade
    
    Additives
    
    to
    to
    to
    to
    TO
    to
    Page 2 of 6
    [5-217]
    

    -------
    UIC INSPECTION REPORT
    SECTION II - HYDROGEOLOGIC INFORMATION (continued)
    2. Geologic Environment:
    a. Name of Injection Format ion/Interval	Tertiary Lakeshore Stock Complex
    Geologic Age of Injection Formation		
    Depth (Subsea) to top of Formation	1000-1500 ft.
    Depth (Subsea) to Base of Formation	2500-3000 ft.
    Depth (Subsea) of Injection Zone(s): 1000-3000 ft.	
    From	 To	 Lithology 	 TDS 	
    From 	 To 	 Lithology 	 TDS 	
    From 	 To 	 Lithology 	 TDS 	
    From 	 To 	 Lithology 	 TDS 	
    Lithology: Quartz Monzomte Porphyry
    Additional Information: 	
    b.	Confining Formation Name(s): Tertiary Fanqlomerate & Cretaceous volcamcs
    Permeability: medium to high, dependent on fracturing.	sediments.
    Geologic Age of Confining Formation: 	
    Lithology: Coarse-grained, poorly sorted Fanglomerate finely crystaline volcanic
    Depth of Confining Zone(s):
    From Surf ace To 3000' Lithology 	
    From 	 To	 Lithology 	
    Dependent upon structural complexity
    Additional Information: 	
    c.	Recent Geologic History Including Seismic/Volcanic Activity
    3. Subsurface Geology and Hydrology for Well Site:
    Attach the following information or note that the information is to be
    requested at the time of inspection. Where applicable, information on an area
    within a 1/2 mile radius of the well bore should be included.
    a.	Map of facility grounds with well locations shown.
    b.	Indicate the depth to the base of the lowest USDW.
    c.	Well logs on Injection Wells.
    d.	As-built diagram of injection well(s).
    e.	Location (horizontal and vertical) and data (water quality and
    availability) for public drinking water supply wells and for
    monitoring wells which are part of the injection project.
    f.	Geologic cross section(s) through injection well(s) down to at least
    the base of the lowest injection zone.
    g.	Regional hydraulic gradient within the injection zone (direcrion and
    quantity).
    h.	Bibliograpny of information used in preparing Section II, parts 2 and
    5.
    Page 3 of 6
    [5-218]
    

    -------
    UIC INSPECTION REPORT
    SECTION J I I - OPERATING DATA
    1.	Description of Injection Operation (Including brief history):
    Area originally mined conventionally via block caving. Injection of m-situ
    leach material into caved zone via surface injection facility. Also conducting
    solution /mmng into un-mined ore body via in-mine horizontal - sub horizontal
    injection wells.
    See letter (W Enclosures) to Carol Boughton from John Kline, dates 7/23/85
    For further details
    2.	Surface Facilities/Treatment Processes:
    Solvent extraction plant and electrowinning plant.
    See Fig. 5
    3. I ndustria I/Wastewater Sources (processes by which the injected fluid is
    produced):
    NA
    4.	Generalized Fluid/Waste Category(Ies)/Composition:
    93% surfuric acid solution
    5.	Method of Delivery of Fluid to the Injection Well(s):
    Flowline
    Page 4 of 6
    [5-219]
    

    -------
    UIC INSPECTION REPORT
    SECTION III - OPERATING DATA (continued)
    6.	Mechanical Integrity Testing (include copy of pressure recording
    charts/records):
    Date of Last MIT none Type of MIT	
    Results 	
    7.	Operational Monitoring of Injection Well (at time of inspection): See Table 4
    Injection Rate	Injection Pressure	Annular Pressure	
    Fluid Temperature	Ambient Temperature	pH	
    Daily Volume (average)	Daily Volume (maximum)	
    Monthly Volume (ave)	Monthly Volume (max)	
    Pressure Gauge Type	Pressure Range	Increment	
    Calibration Date	Recorder Type	Location	
    8.	Any Previous Problems with Well(s): n0
    If yes, describe
    9.	Attach the following information (note if unavailable):
    1.	All Appropriate Analyses of Injectate
    2.	All Appropriate Operating Records
    3.	Date and Report of Last Major Workcver
    SECTION IV - SAMPLING INFORMATION (If applicable)
    1. Samp Ie Data
    Sample ID	 Date	
    Time	Sampling Point	
    Sample Type	
    Analyses RequesTed	
    Preservatives Used	
    Name(s) of Collector(s)	
    2.	Field Data
    Temperature	pH	
    Specific Conductance					
    3.	Chain of Custody
    Identify Analytical Laboratory to be Used
    Indicate Chain of CusTody Form and field daTa rorm are attached to
    sample(s) by circling	YES
    Page 5 of 6
    [5-220]
    

    -------
    UIC INSPECTION REPORT
    SECTION Y - RECORDKEEPING
    1.	List Records Reviewed and Reasons for their Review (reference all documents
    that were borrowed or copied):
    a)	Environmental assessment, dated 10/82, submitted by Noranda to US Dept. of
    Interior, Mineral Management Service
    b)	"Hydrometallurgy at Lakeshore", 4/83, AZ-Conference-AIME
    c)	Noranda's in-house files
    d)	Open files, office of Waste and water Quality Management, Division of Environment
    Health Services, Dept. of Health Services, Phoenix, AZ
    2.	Describe any Inadequacies in Record Keeping Procedures (Note if any
    required information was unavailable or incomplete or Inaccurate with
    special attention paid to pressure and flow measurement records and
    construction schedules if relevant):
    None -- Wells monitored constantly via computer.
    SECTION VI - FINDINGS AMD CONCLUSIONS
    1.	Describe all Findings and Remarks:
    Very wel1-momtored system; it is in operator's best interest to recover all
    injected fluid, as it is 'pregnant' with elemental copper. Hydrogeology
    supports argument that injections is several miles from USDW.
    2.	List Conclusions:
    Injection operation is maintained such that virtually all injectate is
    recovered. Should systematically test wells for mtegn ty--no regulations
    regarding this at present.
    3.	List Recommendations:
    None.
    Page 6 of 6
    [5-221]
    

    -------
    
    SPECIMEN NO
    DRINKING WATER QUALITY
    INORGANIC CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORTING FORM
    _	Before completing, please read instructions on revet se side		
    	NOTE: WATER SYSTEM MUST COMPLETE ALL BLANKS INSIDE THIS BOX	
    .5/21/86
    OATE REC 0
    PWS 10 NO
    0
    4
    
    
    
    
    
    LAS NAME ANO AOORESS
    WESTERN TECHNOLOGIES, INC
    3737 East Broadway Road
    P.O. Box 213 8 7
    Phoenix, Arizona 85036
    LAB
    10 NO
    0 0 0 1 0
    WATER SYSTEM NAME
    SAMPLE OATE
    Mo
    Day
    Yf
    Q
    5
    2
    0
    8
    6
    
    
    31
    36
    
    
    SAMPLE
    Type
    
    Tim# (HrJ )
    D
    
    1
    0
    3
    7
    31
    
    
    :a"
    
    SAMPLING POINT-WEIL NO OR EXACT LOCATION
    G.K. Village
    MAILING NAME AND AOORESS
    Noranda Lakeshore Mines, Inc
    P.O. Box C-6
    Casa Grande, AZ 85222
    SAMPLER'S COMMENTS OR INSTRUCTIONS
    SAMPLE APPEARANCE
    X
    Clear
    
    Turbid
    
    Other Icommentl
    WAIEB SUPPLY
    SOURCE
    X
    Well
    
    Surface
    SAMPLE TYPE COOES
    C - Chack Sanoit
    0 - Rtqu'ir 0'»(Ion
    Simple
    P - PUnt Tip SiffipU
    R - Witir S*n»e'«
    S - So«cUI S*ripl»
    CONTAMINANT
    COOE
    1
    0
    0
    5
    1
    0
    1
    0
    1
    0
    1
    5
    1
    0
    2
    0
    1
    0
    2
    5
    1
    0
    3
    0
    1
    0
    3
    5
    1
    0
    4
    0
    1
    0
    4
    5
    1
    0
    5
    0
    1
    9
    2
    7
    1
    0
    1
    6
    1
    0
    1
    7
    1
    0
    2
    2
    1
    9
    1
    5
    1
    0
    2
    8
    1
    0
    3
    1
    1
    0
    3
    2
    1
    9
    2
    5
    1
    0
    5
    2
    1
    0
    5
    5
    1
    9
    3
    0
    1
    0
    9
    5
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    COMMENTS
    ANALYSIS
    METHOO
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    7
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    3
    1
    0
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    O
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    3
    5
    1
    0
    1
    1
    3
    7
    1
    3
    9
    1
    0
    1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CONTAMINANT
    NAME
    (MCL)
    Arsenic
    Barium
    Cadmium
    Chromium
    Fluoride
    Lead
    Mercury
    NitrateslNI
    Selenium
    Silver
    Alkalinity
    Calcium
    Chloride
    Copper
    Hardness
    Iron
    Manganese
    PH
    Sodium
    Sulfate
    TDS
    Zinc
    Nickel
    I0.05
    1.
    I0.010I
    10.051
    [1.4-2.01
    [0.051
    1.0021
    10.;
    10.01
    10.05
    Magnesium
    Chromium VI
    Mass Balance
    ANALYSIS
    RESULTS Img/ll
    0.023
    <0-1
    
    -------
    8605522
    SPECIMEN NO
    DRINKING WATER QUALITY
    INORGANIC CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORTING FORM
    _	Be/ore comoleting. a/case read instructions on reverse side		
    	NOTE:WATER SYSTEM MUST COMPLETE ALL BLANKS INSIDE THIS BOX	
    5/21/86
    OATE REC 0
    PWS ID NO
    0 |4
    
    
    
    "
    
    LAB NAME ANO ADORESS
    WESTERN TECHNOLOGIES, INC
    3737 East Broadway Road
    P.O. Box 21387
    Phoenix, Arizona 85036
    LAO
    IONO
    0 0 0 1 0
    SAMPLE OATE
    Mo
    Day
    Yr
    0
    5
    2
    0
    8
    6
    
    
    31
    36
    
    
    WATER SYSTEM NAME
    SAMPLING POINT-WELL NO OR EXACT LOCATION
    Well #3
    MAILING NAME ANO AOORESS
    Noranda Lakeshore Mines, Inc.
    P.O. Box C-6
    Casa Grande, AZ 85222
    SAMPLE APPEARANCE
    X
    Clear
    
    Turbid
    
    Other (comment |
    SAMPLE
    Type
    
    TIm« < Hr» )
    D
    
    ll ol 4| 7
    
    
    IB 41
    WATER SUPPLY
    SOURCE
    X]
    Well
    
    Surface
    SAMPLER'S COMMENTS OR INSTRUCTIONS
    •SAMPIE TYPE COOES
    C - Cbtck Simoii
    0 - Regular Olt'f'&utlon
    Sample
    P - Plant ftp SawpU
    R - Ri» Water Sampla
    S - Special S*moW
    CONTAMINANT
    COOE
    1
    0
    0
    5
    1
    0
    1
    O
    1
    0
    1
    5
    1
    0
    2
    0
    1
    0
    2
    5
    1
    0
    3
    O
    1
    0
    3
    5
    1
    0
    4
    O
    1
    0
    4
    5
    1
    0
    5
    O
    1
    9
    2
    7
    1
    0
    1
    6
    1
    O
    1
    7
    1
    0
    2
    2
    1
    9
    1
    5
    1
    0
    2
    8
    1
    0
    3
    1
    1
    0
    3
    2
    1
    9
    2
    5
    1
    0
    5
    2
    1
    0
    5
    5
    1
    9
    3
    0
    1
    0
    9
    5
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    COMMENTS
    ANALYSIS
    METMOO
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    7
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    3
    1
    0
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    3
    5
    1
    O
    1
    1
    3
    7
    1
    3
    9
    1
    0
    1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CONTAMINANT
    NAME IMCLI
    Arsenic
    Barium
    Cadmium
    Chromium
    Fluoride
    Lead
    Mercury
    NitratoslNl
    Selenium
    Silver
    Alkalinity
    Calcium
    Chloride
    Copper
    Hardness
    Iron
    PH
    Sodium
    Sulfate
    TDS
    Zinc
    Nickel
    10.05
    M.
    I0.010I
    10.051
    11.4-2.0)
    [0 05!
    0021
    10
    10.011
    10.051
    Magnesium
    Manganese
    Chromium VI
    Mass Balance
    ANALYSIS
    RESULTS lmq/11
    0.02
    <0 . 1
    <0 . ons
    <0.02
    2.0
    <0.02
    <0 .001
    3 . 6
    <0.01
    <0.02
    153
    34
    158
    <0.05
    171
    <0 . 1
    21
    <0 .05
    7 . 9
    174
    140
    684
    <0.05
    <0.1
    <0 .05
    1.03
    Reviewed by	pf/ttklrfVl&Tt
    EXCEEDS
    r u IfJJM 3 R 9 - 9
    nnri"
    PECtMRfO
    »nd ALL COMantft
    in tr>»
    c Biunn
    -223
    NY
    »
    -------
    8605521
    SPECIMEN NO
    DRINKING WATER QUALITY
    INORGANIC CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORTING FORM
    		Belore comolettng. olease read instructions on reverse side		
    	NOTE: WATER SYSTEM MUST COMPLETE ALL BLANKS INSIDE THIS BOX	
    5/21/86
    OATE REC D
    PWS 10 NO
    O
    4
    
    
    
    
    
    LAS NAME ANO AOORESS ^
    O 0
    0
    1 0
    43 46
    WESTERN TECHNOLOGIES, INC
    
    
    
    3737 East Broadway Road
    
    
    
    P.O.Box 21387
    
    
    
    Phoenix, Arizona 85036
    
    
    
    WATER SYSTEM NAME
    SAMPLE DATE
    Mo
    Oay
    If
    0
    5
    2
    0
    8
    6
    
    
    
    36
    
    
    SAMPLE
    Type
    
    
    ime
    
    -------
    8605520
    SPECIMEN NO
    OniNKING WATER QUALITY
    INORGANIC CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORTING FORM
    		Be/ore completing, please read instructions on reverse side		
    	NOTE: WATER SYSTEM MUST COMPLETE ALL BLANKS INSIDE THIS BOX	
    5/21/86
    OATE REC D
    PWS IO NO
    0
    4
    
    
    
    " |
    LAB NAME AND ADDRESS
    WESTERN TECHNOLOGIES, INC
    3737 East Broadway Road
    P.O. Box 21387
    Phoenix, Arizona 85036
    ,rJUo|o|oM 0
    WATER SYSTEM NAME
    SAMPLE OATE
    MO
    Oay
    Yr
    0
    5
    2
    0
    8
    6
    
    
    31
    36
    
    
    SAMPLE
    Type
    
    Time (Hrs )
    D
    
    1
    0
    1
    7
    37
    
    
    ]B 4 1
    
    SAMPLING POINT-WELL NO OR EXACT LOCATION
    EA-2
    MAILING NAME ANO AOORESS
    Noranda Lakeshore Mines, Inc
    P.O. Box C-6
    Casa Grande, AZ 85222
    SAMPLER'S COMMENTS OR INSTRUCTIONS
    SAMPLE APPEARANCE
    X
    Clear
    
    Turbid
    
    Other Icommentl
    water supply
    SOURCE
    X
    Well
    
    Surface
    1AMPLC TYPE COOC3
    C - Cfitck Stmplt
    0 - Regultr Distribution
    S*<«pl«
    P - Plant Sttnpli
    R — Ra« Wttif
    S - SptcUl Smelt
    CONTAMINANT
    CODE
    1
    0
    0
    5
    1
    0
    1
    0
    1
    0
    1
    5
    1
    0
    2
    0
    1
    0
    2
    5
    1
    0
    3
    0
    1
    0
    3
    5
    1
    0
    4
    0
    1
    0
    4
    5
    1
    0
    5
    0
    1
    9
    2
    7
    1
    0
    1
    6
    1
    0
    1
    7
    1
    0
    2
    2
    1
    9
    1
    5
    1
    0
    2
    8
    1
    0
    3
    1
    1
    O
    3
    2
    1
    9
    2
    5
    1
    0
    5
    2
    1
    0
    5
    5
    1
    9
    3
    0
    1
    0
    9
    5
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    ANALYSIS
    METHOO
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    7
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    3
    1
    0
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    O
    1
    1
    3
    5
    1
    0
    1
    1
    3
    7
    1
    3
    9
    1
    0
    1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    |
    
    I
    CONTAMINANT
    NAME	(MCLI
    Arsenic
    Barium
    Cadmium
    Chromium
    Fluoride
    Lead
    Mercury
    NitrateslNI
    Selenium
    Silver
    Alkalinity
    Calcium
    Chloride
    Copper
    Hardness
    Iron
    Magnesium
    Manganese
    PH
    Sodium
    Sulfate
    TDS
    Zinc
    Nickel
    IO 05
    1.
    10.0101
    [0.051
    11.4-2.0|
    10.051
    002
    110.1
    10.01
    I 0.05
    Chromium VI
    Mass Balance
    analysis
    RESULTS (mq/l)
    <0.02
    <0.1
    <0.005
    <0.02
    1.0
    <0 .02
    <0 . 001
    7.6
    <0.01
    <0 .02
    164.
    77,
    180.
    <0 . 05
    114 .
    <0 . 1
    37.
    <0 . 05
    8.1
    161.
    240 .
    930
    <0.05
    <0 .1
    <0.05
    0.99
    EXCEEDS
    "urjuiM *: P0 •
    -'tftW
    AEQUinCD "
    infl ALL cent i r
    cf»rc Wtf In t'f
    c olunn
    •121
    l-lr«(i)
    HCPftl
    10
    c
    ODE
    
    
    
    ANALYSIS OATE
    Mo
    Oay
    Yr
    0
    6
    1
    3
    8
    6
    COMMENTS
    Reviewed by	.(Auum.
    mm	
    -------
    DRINKING WATER QUALITY
    INORGANIC CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORTING FORM
    8 6 0 5 519		Before comoleting. olease read instructions on reverse side
    5/21/86
    SPECIMEN NO OATF. neco
    	NOTE: WATER SYSTEM MUST COMPLETE ALL BLANKS INSIDE THIS BOX	
    PWS ID NO
    O 14 |
    
    
    
    I 7
    LAB NAME AND ADDRESS 0
    0
    0 1 0
    
    42 46
    WESTERN TECHNOLOGIES, INC
    
    
    3737 East Broadway Road
    
    
    P.O. Box 213 8 7
    
    
    Phoenix, Arizona 85036
    
    
    SAMPLE OATE
    Mo
    Day
    Yr
    0 5
    ro
    o
    8 6
    J6
    SAMPLE
    Type
    
    Time (Mrs )
    D
    in
    CO
    o
    0
    37	38 * t
    WATER SYSTEM NAME
    SAMPLING POINT-WELL NO OR EXACT LOCATION
    ea-~3
    MAILING NAME AND AOORESS
    Noranda Lakeshore Mines, Inc.
    P.O. Box C-6
    Casa Grande, AZ 85222
    SAMPLER'S COMMENTS OR INSTRUCTIONS
    SAMPLE APPEARANCE
    X
    Clear
    
    Turbid
    
    Other Icommentl
    WATER SUPPLY
    SOURCE
    X
    Well
    
    Surface
    SAMPLE TYPC COOES
    C - Chtck Stmplt
    0 - RaquUr OUlHSutlon
    P - Plant ftp
    R - Raw Witir Stmpit
    S - Special Simplf
    CONTAMINANT
    CODE
    1
    0
    0
    5
    1
    0
    1
    0
    1
    0
    1
    5
    1
    0
    2
    0
    II
    0
    2
    5
    1
    0
    3
    0
    1
    0
    3
    5
    1
    0
    4
    0
    1
    0
    4
    5
    1
    0
    5
    0
    1
    9
    2
    7
    1
    0
    1
    6
    1
    O
    1
    7
    1
    0
    2
    2
    .1
    9
    1
    5
    1
    0
    2
    8
    1
    0
    3
    1
    1
    0
    3
    2
    1
    9
    2
    5
    1
    0
    5
    2
    1
    0
    5
    5
    1
    9
    3
    0
    1
    0
    9
    5
    '
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    ¦
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    ANALYSIS
    METHOO
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    7
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    3
    1
    0
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    3
    5
    1
    0
    1
    1
    3
    7
    1
    3
    9
    1
    0
    1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CONTAMINANT
    NAME
    (MCU
    Arsenic
    Barium
    Cadmium
    Chromium
    Fluoride
    Lead
    Mercury
    NitratoslNI
    Selenium
    Silver
    Alkalinity
    Calcium
    Chloride
    Copper
    Hardness
    Iron
    PH
    Sodium
    Sulfate
    TDS
    Zinc
    Nickel
    10.051
    1
    |0 0101
    10.05
    Il.4-2.0I
    10 051
    [.0021
    110
    10.01
    I 0.05
    Magnesium
    Manganese
    Chromium VI
    Mass Balance
    ANALYSIS
    RESULTS ImQ/ll
    <0 .02
    <0 . 1
    <0 . 005
    <0.02
    0
    <0.02
    <0.001
    4.6
    <0.01
    <0.02
    188
    30.
    41,
    <0.05
    114
    <0 .1
    9 . 5
    <0.05
    8.0
    117
    100
    444
    <0.05
    <0 . 1
    <0.05
    1.01
    EXCEEDS
    P I. r H, A M 3 P9-3
    eeh J j "fif i
    ft C QUi^F D ' 2'
    i nd -L L :ontinin
    chfcWd In ihf
    ?:'
    » r. t ( })
    C fffl J
    LOCATION
    COOF
    
    
    
    :q xi
    ANALYSIS OATE
    Mo
    Oay
    Yf
    0 |6
    l
    3
    8
    6
    io.ij
    COMMENTS
    Reviewed by /~n-Su\AJ>
    -------
    flfiOSSIB
    SPECIMEN NO
    DRINKING WATER QUALITY
    INORGANIC CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORTING FORM
    		Before comoleting. please read instructions on reverse side		
    	NOTE: WATER SYSTEM MUST COMPLETE ALL BLANKS INSIDE THIS BOX	
    5/21/86
    OATE REC 0
    PWS ID NO
    0
    4
    
    
    
    
    
    LAB NAME AND ADDRESS
    WESTERN TECHNOLOGIES, INC
    3737 East Broadway Road
    P.O. Box 21387
    Phoenix, Arizona 85036
    ¦tttlololQMTo
    42 Jg
    WATER SYSTEM NAME
    SAMPLE DATE
    Mo
    Oay
    ft
    0
    5
    2
    0
    8
    6
    
    
    ji
    36
    
    
    SAMPLE
    Typt
    
    Tim* (Hr» )
    D
    
    0
    9
    1
    5
    It
    
    
    J8-*»
    
    SAMPLING POINT-WELL NO OR EXACT LOCATION
    EA - 4
    MAILING NAME AND ADDRESS
    Noranda Lakeshore Mines, Inc.
    P.O. Box C-6
    Casa Grande, AZ 85222
    SAMPLE APPEARANCE
    X
    Clear
    
    Turbid
    
    Other (commentl
    WATER SUPPLY
    SOUBCE
    X
    Well
    
    Surface
    SAMPLER'S COMMENTS OR INSTRUCTIONS
    SDWA, CR+6, Ni
    ^AMPt.e rypt cooes
    C - C^tch Stool*
    0 - RtguUr Obtr'&ullon
    S»mpi«
    P — Plint Tip Staple
    R - Riw W11 if Sacpl*
    S - SptcUl
    CONTAMINANT
    COOE
    1
    0
    O
    5
    1
    0
    1
    0
    1
    0
    1
    5
    1
    0
    2
    0
    1
    0
    2
    5
    1
    0
    3
    0
    1
    0
    3
    5
    1
    0
    4
    0
    1
    0
    4
    5
    1
    0
    5
    0
    1
    9
    2
    7
    1
    0
    1
    6
    1
    0
    1
    7
    1
    0
    2
    2
    1
    9
    1
    5
    1
    O
    2
    8
    1
    O
    3
    1
    4
    1
    0
    O
    2
    1
    9
    2
    5
    1
    0
    5
    2
    1
    0
    5
    5
    1
    9
    3
    0
    1
    0
    9
    5
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    COMMENTS
    ANALYSIS
    METHOD
    1
    O
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    7
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    3
    1
    0
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    4
    1
    C
    *
    1
    1
    3
    5
    1
    0
    1
    1
    3
    7
    1
    3
    9
    1
    0
    1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CONTAMINANT
    NAME (MCI)
    Arsenic
    Barium
    Cadmium
    Chromium
    Fluoride
    Lead
    Mercury
    Nitrates (N|
    Selenium
    Silver
    Alkalinity
    Calcium
    Chloride
    Copper
    Hardness
    iron
    PH
    Sodium
    Sulfate
    TDS
    Zinc
    Nickel
    I0.05
    1.
    [0.010I
    10.05
    11.4-2.01
    10.05
    1.002
    110.
    10.011
    10.05
    Magnesium
    M3n53noS3
    Chromium VI
    Mass Balance
    ANALYSIS
    RESULTS (mq/11
    <0.02
    <0.1
    <0¦ons
    <0.02
    1.9
    <0.02
    <0 . 001
    <0.2
    <0.01
    <0.02
    307
    15
    73
    <0.05
    62
    <0 . 1
    5.9
    _0 5
    l"
    167
    494
    <0 .05
    <0.1
    <0.05
    1.01
    Reviewed by
    mm
    
    EXCEEDS
    Pur 
    -------
    DRINKING WATER QUALITY
    INORGANIC CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORTING FORM
    8605 777	Before completing, please read instructions on reveise side		5/29/86
    SPECIMEN NO • 0ATE BEC 0
    	NOTE: WATER SYSTEM MUST COMPLETE ALL BLANKS INSIDE THIS BOX	
    PWS ID NO
    O
    4
    
    
    
    
    
    1 7
    LAB NAME AND AOORESS
    o
    o
    o O
    3c
    0 1 0
    
    
    WESTERN TECHNOLOGIES, INC
    
    
    3737 East Broadway Road
    
    
    P.O. Box 21387
    
    
    Phoenix, Arizona 85036
    
    
    SAMPLE OATE
    Mo
    Day
    Yr
    0
    5
    2 18
    8 6
    ji :s
    SAMPLE
    Typt
    
    Time (Hrj )
    D
    
    1
    2
    3
    5
    37	}8-»l
    WATER SYSTEM NAME
    SAMPLING POINT-WELL NO OR EXACT LOCATION
    MS I
    MAILING NAME ANO ADORESS
    Noranda Lakeshore Mines, Inc.
    P.O. Box C-6
    Casa Grande, AZ 85222
    SAMPLER'S COMMENTS OR INSTRUCTIONS
    SAMPLE APPEARANCE
    X
    Clear
    
    Turbid
    
    Other Icommentl
    WATER SUPPLY
    SOURCE
    X
    Well
    
    Surface
    SAMPLE TYPE COOES
    C - Ch«eh St<"0<«
    0 - Riqgltr 011trlbuCton
    Simp'*
    P - Pl«nt f<» S• mpI•
    R - R » » Witir
    S - Sptcltl Stmpit
    CONTAMINANT
    CODE
    1
    0
    0
    5
    1
    0
    1
    0
    1
    0
    1
    5
    1
    0
    2
    0
    1
    0
    2
    5
    1
    0
    3
    0
    1
    0
    3
    5
    1
    0
    4
    0
    1
    0
    4
    5
    1
    0
    5
    0
    1
    9
    2
    7
    1
    0
    1
    6
    1
    0
    1
    7
    1
    0
    2
    2
    1
    9
    1
    5
    1
    0
    2
    8
    1
    0
    3
    1
    1
    0
    3
    2
    1
    9
    2
    5
    1
    0
    5
    2
    1
    0
    5
    5
    1
    9
    3
    0
    1
    0
    9
    5
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    ANALYSIS
    METHOD
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    7
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    3
    1
    0
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    3
    5
    1
    0
    1
    1
    3
    7
    1
    3
    9
    1
    0
    1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CONTAMINANT
    NAME
    (MCL)
    Arsenic
    Barium
    Cadmium
    Chromium
    Fluoride
    Lead
    Mercury
    Nitrates INI
    Selenium
    Silver
    Alkalinity
    Calcium
    Chloride
    Copper
    Hardness
    Iron
    PH
    Sodium
    Sulfate
    TDS
    Zinc
    Nickel
    10.05
    11.
    10.0101
    10.05
    I1.4-2.0I
    I 0.05
    1.002
    110.
    10.01
    10.05
    Magnesium
    Manganese
    Chromium VI
    Mass Balance
    ANALYSIS
    RESULTS Imq/I)
    <0.02
    <0 . 5
    <0.005
    <0 . 1
    0.5
    <0.1
    <0.001
    2.4
    <0.01
    <0.02
    97.
    8 . 8
    53
    <0.05
    22
    <0
    "
    -------
    8605783
    SPECIMEN NO
    DRINKING WATER QUALITY
    INORGANIC CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORTING FORM
    		Before comoleting. please read instructions on reveise side		
    	NOTE: WATER SYSTEM MUST COMPLETE ALL BLANKS INSIDE THIS BOX	
    5/29/86
    DATE bec o
    PWS IO NO
    0
    4
    
    
    
    
    
    LAB NAME AND AOORESS
    WESTERN TECHNOLOGIES, INC
    3737 East Broadway Road
    P.O.Box 21387
    Phoenix, Arizona 85036
    .rjololon o
    WATER SYSTEM NAME
    SAMPLE OATE
    Mo
    Oay
    Yr
    0
    5
    2
    8
    8
    6
    
    
    31
    36
    
    
    SAMPLE
    Typ«
    
    Tim* (Hrs )
    D
    
    1
    2
    5
    5
    37
    
    
    38-41
    
    SAMPLING POINT-WELL NO OR EXACT LOCATION
    MS 2
    MAILING NAME ANO AOORESS
    Noranda Lakeshore Mines, Inc.
    P.O. Box C-6
    Casa Grande, AZ 85222
    SAMPLE APPEARANCE
    X
    Clear
    
    Turbid
    
    Other Icommentl
    WATER SUPPLY
    SOURCE
    X
    Well
    
    Surface
    SAMPLER'S COMMENTS OR INSTRUCTIONS
    SAMPLE TYPE COOCS
    C - Chtch S«f*pU
    0 - Rtgular Oiltributfon
    P - Plant Tip Si in pit
    R - Rt» Witir Sl«pU
    S - Sptdil Sampir
    CONTAMINANT
    COOE
    1
    0
    0
    5
    1
    0
    1
    O
    1
    0
    1
    5
    1
    O
    2
    0
    1
    0
    2
    5
    1
    0
    3
    0
    1
    0
    3
    5
    1
    0
    4
    0
    1
    0
    4
    5
    1
    O
    5
    0
    1
    9
    2
    7
    1
    O
    1
    6
    1
    O
    1
    7
    1
    O
    2
    2
    1
    9
    1
    5
    1
    O
    2
    8
    1
    O
    3
    1
    1
    0
    3
    2
    1
    9
    2
    5
    1
    O
    5
    2
    1
    O
    5
    5
    1
    9
    3
    0
    1
    O
    9
    5
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    ANALYSIS
    METHOD
    1
    0
    1
    1
    O
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    7
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    3
    1
    0
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    3
    5
    1
    0
    1
    1
    3
    7
    1
    3
    9
    1
    0
    1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CONTAMINANT
    NAME
    (MCL)
    ANALYSIS
    RESULTS (mq/U
    Arsenic
    Barium
    Cadmium
    Chromium
    Fluoride
    Lead
    Mercury
    NitrateslNl
    Selenium
    Silver
    Alkalinity
    Calcium
    Chloride
    Copper
    Hardness
    Iron
    PH
    Sodium
    Sulfate
    TDS
    Zinc
    Nickel
    I0.05
    11 I
    10.0101
    10.05
    11.4-2.0|
    10.05
    1.0021
    110.
    10.01
    [0.05
    Magnesium
    Manganese
    Chromium VI
    Mass Balance
    
    e • 14 *
    LOCATION
    TODF
    
    
    
    :e do
    ANALYSIS OATE
    Mo
    Oay I Yi
    0
    6
    2 |6
    8
    6
    COMMENTS
    Reviewed by
    CJC
    ANALYST
    •JA
    [5-229]
    

    -------
    8605782
    SPECIMEN NO.
    DRINKING WATER QUALITY
    INORGANIC CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORTING FORM
    		Before como/eling. please read instructions on reverse side		
    	NOTE: WATER SYSTEM MUST COMPLETE ALL BLANKS INSIDE THIS BOX	
    5/29/86
    DATE REC 0
    PWS 10 NO
    0 |4
    
    1
    
    
    LAB NAME ANO AOORESS
    LA8
    10 NO
    010 0 1 0
    
    42-IS
    WESTERN TECHNOLOGIES, INC
    
    
    3737 East Broadway Road
    
    
    P.O.Box 21387
    
    
    Phoenix, Arizona 85036
    
    
    WATER SYSTEM NAME
    SAMPLE DATE
    Mo
    Oay
    Yf
    0
    5
    2
    8
    8
    6
    
    
    31
    36
    
    
    SAMPLE
    Type
    
    Tlm« (Hri)
    D
    
    1
    3
    3
    0
    
    
    
    30-41
    
    SAMPLING POINT-WELL NO OR EXACT LOCATION
    _M£_L
    MAILING NAME ANO AOORESS
    Noranda Lakeshore Mines, Inc
    P.O. Box C-6
    Casa Grande, AZ 85222
    sample appearance
    X
    Clear
    
    Turbid
    
    Other Icommentl
    iVATER SUPPLY
    SOURCE
    X
    Well
    
    Surface
    SAMPLER'S COMMENTS OR INSTRUCTIONS
    1AMPIE TVPC COOES
    C - Cbtck StffOlt
    0 - RijuUr OWtrJftutlon
    SampU
    P - Plant Tap Sampla
    R - At* Witar Sanpla
    S - Spiclal SanpU
    CONTAMINANT
    COOS
    1
    0
    0
    5
    1
    O
    1
    O
    1
    0
    1
    5
    1
    0
    2
    0
    1
    0
    2
    5
    1
    0
    3
    0
    1
    0
    3
    5
    1
    0
    4
    0
    1
    0
    4
    5
    1
    0
    5
    0
    1
    9
    2
    7
    1
    O
    1
    6
    1
    O
    1
    7
    1
    0
    2
    2
    1
    9
    1
    5
    1
    0
    2
    8
    1
    0
    3
    1
    1
    O
    3
    2
    1
    9
    2
    5
    1
    O
    5
    2
    1
    0
    5
    5
    1
    9
    3
    0
    1
    O
    9
    5
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    COMMENTS
    ANALYSIS
    METHOO
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    7
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    3
    1
    0
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    9
    1
    O
    1
    1
    4
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    O
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    3
    5
    1
    0
    1
    1
    3
    7
    1
    3
    9
    1
    0
    1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CONTAMINANT
    NAME	(MCL)
    ANALYSIS
    RESULTS (mg/ll
    Arsenic
    Barium
    Cadmium
    Chromium
    Fluoride
    Load
    Mercury
    Nitrates INI
    Selenium
    Silver
    Alkalinity
    Calcium
    Chloride
    Copper
    Hardness
    Iron
    Manganese
    PH
    Sodium
    Sulfate
    TPS
    Zinc
    Nickel
    10.05
    11.
    |0 0101
    10-05
    (1.4-2.01
    10.05
    1.0021
    110.1
    10.011
    10.051
    Magnesium
    Chromium VI
    Mass Balance
    <0.02
    <0.5
    <0-005
    <0.02
    0 . 4
    <0.02
    <0 .001
    2.6
    <0.01
    <0.02
    119
    59
    248
    <0 .05
    181
    <0 . 1
    8 . 2
    <0.05
    7.8
    180
    54
    652
    <0.05
    <0.1
    <0.05
    1.07
    Reviewed by	L
    mm
    isyLdJyh. /
    EXCEEDS
    Pursuant to P9-9-223
    cftfc' limpid art
    Rfoumeo f ^ \ny
    and ALL e om • mlna M (i)
    c »c h • d In t h» iicitei
    : o'umn
    10
    lUhON
    ODE
    
    
    
    :b »
    ANALYSIS OATE
    Mo | Oay
    Yr
    0
    6
    2
    6
    8
    6
    it n
    CJC
    ANALYST
    [5-230]
    

    -------
    8605781
    SPECIMEN NO
    DRINKING WATER QUALITY
    INORGANIC CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORTING FORM
    		Be/ore completing. please read instructions on reverse side		
    	NOTE: WATER SYSTEM MUST COMPLETE ALL BLANKS INSIDE THIS BOX	
    5/29 /Bfi
    DATE BEC 0
    PWS ID NO
    o |4 | |
    
    
    
    LAB NAME ANO ADDRESS
    ¦„«I o I o I o I 1 |0
    WESTERN TECHNOLOGIES, INC
    3737 East Broadway Road
    P.O.Box 21387
    Phoenix, Arizona 85036
    WATER SYSTEM NAME
    SAMPLE DATE
    Mo
    0»y
    Yr
    0
    5
    2
    8
    8
    6
    
    
    31
    it
    
    
    SAMPLE
    Trp«
    
    Tlm« j Hii |
    D
    
    0
    9 0
    5
    
    
    
    J9
    
    SAMPLING POINT-WELL NO OR EXACT LOCATION
    MC 2
    MAILING NAME ANO AOORESS
    Noranda Lakeshore Mines, Inc.
    P.O. Box C-6
    Casa Grande, A2 85222
    SAMPLE APPEARANCE
    X
    Clear
    
    Turbid
    
    Other Icommentl
    WATER SUPPLY
    SOURCE
    X
    Well
    
    Surface
    SAMPLER'S COMMENTS OR INSTRUCTIONS
    SAMPLE TYPE COOES
    C Chach Simplt
    0 ~ Rtqyltr Dlitrlbvtlan
    S tmpia
    P - PUnt Ti p S ifl<9l«
    R - Ra« Witir
    S - Special Simol>
    CONTAMINANT
    C00E
    1
    0
    O
    5
    1
    O
    1
    O
    1
    0
    1
    5
    1
    0
    2
    O
    1
    0
    2
    5
    1
    0
    3
    O
    1
    0
    3
    5
    1
    0
    4
    O
    1
    0
    4
    5
    1
    0
    5
    O
    1
    9
    2
    7
    1
    0
    1
    6
    1
    O
    1
    7
    1
    0
    2
    2
    1
    9
    1
    5
    1
    O
    2
    8
    1
    0
    3
    1
    1
    0
    3
    2
    1
    9
    2
    5
    1
    0
    5
    2
    1
    0
    5
    5
    1
    9
    3
    O
    1
    0
    9
    5
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    COMMENTS
    ANALYSIS
    METHOD
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    7
    1
    0
    1
    1
    O
    3
    1
    0
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    1
    1
    O
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    3
    5
    1
    0
    1
    1
    3
    7
    1
    3
    9
    1
    0
    1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CONTAMINANT
    NAME (MCI]
    ANALYSIS
    RESULTS (mg/l)
    Arsenic
    Barium
    Cadmium
    Chromium
    Fluoride
    Lead
    Mercury
    NitrateslNI
    Selenium
    Silver
    Alkalinity
    Calcium
    Chloride
    Copper
    Hardness
    Iron
    Manganese
    PH
    Sodium
    Sulfate
    TDS
    Zinc
    Nickel
    I0.05
    1.
    [0.0101
    10.05
    11.4-2.01
    I 0.05
    1.002
    I10.
    10.01
    I 0.05
    Magnesium
    Chromium VI
    Mass Balance
    <0.02
    <0.5
    <0 . 005
    <0.02
    
    <0.02
    <0 . 001
    5 . 6
    <0.01
    <0.02
    119.
    3 . 1
    24
    <0.05
    <0 .1
    <1.
    <0.05
    8 . 5
    91
    37
    316
    <0.05
    <0 . 1
    <0 .05
    0.91
    Reviewed by fthlodxiH.	,
    mm	'
    EXCEEDS
    PurluiM u R9-9-223
    chick	mplf» i r«
    RE0UJRCD fo t ant
    i nd ALL C«nt ifflinint (i}
    chec^ In trti iic iidi
    eslwmn,
    10
    :aiion
    ODE
    
    
    ANALYSIS DATE
    Mo
    Day
    Yl
    0
    6
    2
    6
    8j 6
    22 :?
    CJC
    ANALYST
    [5-231]
    

    -------
    8605784
    SPECIMEN NO
    DRINKING WATER QUALITY
    INORGANIC CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORTING FORM
    		Before comoleting. please read instructions on reverse side		
    	NOTE: WATER SYSTEM MUST COMPLETE ALL BLANKS INSIDE THIS BOX	
    
    OATE REC 0
    PWS IO NO
    0
    4I
    
    
    
    
    UX8 NAME ANO ADDRESS
    WESTERN TECHNOLOGIES, INC
    3737 East Broadway Road
    P.O.Box 21387
    Phoenix, Arizona 85036
    r01 oi o i o 11 [o
    WATER SYSTEM NAME
    SAMPLE OATE
    Mo
    Oay
    ft
    0
    5
    2
    8
    8
    6
    
    
    31
    36
    
    
    SAMPLE
    Typ«
    
    Tlrr*« (Hr* )
    D
    
    0
    9
    4
    0
    
    
    
    38 -4
    
    SAMPLING POINT-WELL NO OR EXACT LOCATION
    MC 3
    MAILING NAME ANO AOORESS
    Noranda Lakeshore Mines, Inc.
    P.O. Box C-6
    Casa Grande, AZ 85222
    SAMPLER'S COMMENTS OR INSTRUCTIONS
    SAMPLE APPEARANCE
    X
    Clear
    
    Turbid
    
    Other [commentl
    WATER SUPPLY
    SOURCE
    X
    Well
    
    Surface
    1AMPIE TVP6 COOES
    C - CNtcK Stmpl*
    0 — Rifu'tr OlatMbutlon
    S* fnpl«
    P - Flint T*p S*mpl«
    R - R«v Wttir Sinpl#
    S - Spacltl
    CONTAMINANT
    COOE
    1
    0
    0
    5
    1
    0
    1
    0
    1
    0
    1
    5
    1
    0
    2
    0
    1
    0
    2
    5
    1
    O
    3
    O
    1
    0
    3
    5
    1
    0
    4
    O
    1
    0
    4
    5
    1
    0
    5
    0
    1
    9
    2
    7
    1
    O
    1
    6
    1
    O
    1
    7
    1
    O
    2
    2
    1
    9
    1
    5
    1
    O
    2
    8
    1
    O
    3
    1
    1
    0
    3
    2
    1
    9
    2
    5
    1
    0
    5
    2
    1
    0
    5
    5
    1
    9
    3
    0
    1
    0
    9
    5
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    ANALYSIS
    METHOD
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    7
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    3
    1
    0
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    3
    5
    1
    0
    1
    1
    3
    7
    1
    3
    9
    1
    0
    1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CONTAMINANT
    NAME
    (MCLI
    ANALYSIS
    RESULTS (mg/1
    Arsenic
    Barium
    Cadmium
    Chromium
    Fluoride
    Lead
    Mercury
    Nitrates INI
    Selenium
    Silver
    Alkalinity
    Calcium
    Chloride
    Copper
    Hardness
    Iron
    PH
    Sodium
    Sulfate
    TPS
    Zinc
    Nickel
    [0.05
    1.
    10.0101
    10.05
    11.4-2.01
    [0.051
    1.0021
    110.
    10.01
    10.051
    Magnesium
    Manganese
    Chromium VI
    Mass Balance
    <0.02
    <0 . 5
    <0 .005
    <0.02
    0.8
    <0 .02
    <0 .001
    1.4
    <0 .01
    <0.02
    85
    23
    53
    <0.05
    57
    <0.1
    <1.
    <0 .05
    8.3
    134
    160
    468
    <0 .05
    <0.1
    <0.05
    1.05
    EXCEEDS
    PvriudM la R9-3-223
    ;n»ch iim?iM s re
    REQUIRED	NY
    ind At.1 C o n t a mln« a t (i )
    ehecktd Ifi tM c icifdi
    column.
    r
    "aTiOn
    OOF
    
    
    
    ANALYSIS DATE
    Mo
    Oay
    Yr
    0
    6
    2
    6
    8
    6
    COMMENTS
    Reviewed by	n J*±k 
    -------
    8605779
    SPECIMEN NO
    DRINKING WATER QUALITY
    INORGANIC CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORTING FORM
    		Before comolettng. please read instructions on reveise side		
    	NOTE: WATER SYSTEM MUST COMPLETE ALL BLANKS INSIDE THIS BOX	
    5/29/86
    DATE REC q,
    PWS ID NO
    0
    <1
    1 1
    
    LAB NAME AND ADDRESS
    ,o"o 0 0 0 1 0
    
    4241
    WESTERN TECHNOLOGIES, INC
    
    3737 East Broadway Road
    
    P.O.Box 21387
    
    Phoenix, Arizona 85036
    
    SAMPLE DATE
    Mo
    Oay
    Yi
    U|b
    
    u
    a | b
    WATER SYSTEM NAME
    
    31
    36
    
    SAMPLE
    ryp«
    
    Time (Hr» )
    D
    
    1
    0
    I
    15
    31
    
    
    38-41
    
    SAMPLING POINT-WEIL NO OR EXACT LOCATION
    MC 4
    MAILING NAME ANO ADDRESS
    Noranda Lakeshore Mines, Inc.
    P.O. Box C-6
    Casa Grande, AZ 85222
    SAMPLE APPEARANCE
    X
    Clear
    
    Turbid
    
    Other Icommentl
    WATER SUPPLY
    SOURCE
    X
    Well
    
    Surface
    SAMPLER'S COMMENTS OR INSTRUCTIONS
    SAMPLE TYPE COOES
    C "* Cltach Sanpl*
    D - Rifultr OlairlbullOA
    Sample
    P - Plant T»p SiiuqI*
    R - Ra* Walar Samp't
    S - Special Samplt
    CONTAMINANT
    CODE
    1
    0
    0
    5
    1
    O
    1
    0
    1
    0
    1
    5
    1
    0
    2
    0
    1
    0
    2
    5
    1
    0
    3
    O
    1
    0
    3
    5
    1
    0
    4
    O
    1
    0
    4
    5
    1
    0
    5
    0
    1
    9
    2
    7
    1
    O
    1
    6
    1
    0
    1
    7
    1
    0
    2
    2
    1
    9
    1
    5
    1
    O
    2
    8
    1
    O
    3
    1
    A
    O
    3
    2
    1
    9
    2
    5
    1
    O
    5
    2
    1
    O
    5
    5
    1
    9
    3
    O
    1
    0
    9
    5
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    tO-U
    COMMENTS
    ANALYSIS
    METHOO
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    7
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    3
    1
    0
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    9
    1
    O
    1
    1
    4
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    1
    1
    O
    1
    1
    O
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    3
    5
    1
    0
    1
    1
    3
    7
    1
    3
    9
    1
    0
    1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CONTAMINANT
    NAME
    IMCLI
    ANALYSIS
    RESULTS Img/ll
    Arsenic
    Barium
    Cadmium
    Chromium
    Fluoride
    Lead
    Mercury
    Nitrates INI
    Selenium
    Silver
    Alkalinity
    Calcium
    Chloride
    Copper
    Hardness
    Iron
    Magnesium
    Manganese
    PH
    Sodium
    Sulfate
    TPS
    Zinc
    Nickel
    10.05
    M
    (0.0101
    10.05
    I1.4-2.0I
    10.05
    1.0021
    [10.
    10.01
    [0.05
    Chromium VI
    Mass Balance
    <0.02
    7
    JUL
    <0. Q2
    <0.001
    0.9
    
    -------
    SPECIMEN NO.
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    PWS ID NO.
    
    
    °
    4| |
    
    I
    
    DRINKING WATER QUALITY
    INORGANIC CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORTING FORM
    Before comoleting. a/ease read instructions on reverse side		
    NOTE: WATER SYSTEM MUST COMPLETE ALL BLANKS INSIDE THIS BOX	
    5/29/86
    OATE REC ~
    LAB NAME AND AOORESS
    ,0^0 L2. o o 1 0
    
    43-48
    WESTERN TECHNOLOGIES, INC
    
    3737 East Broadway Road
    
    P.O.Box 21387
    
    Phoenix, Arizona 85036
    
    WATER SYSTEM NAME
    SAMPLE OATE
    Mo
    Day
    Yi
    0
    5
    2
    8
    8
    6
    
    
    31
    :s
    
    
    SAMPLE
    Type
    
    Tlm« (Hrs )
    D
    
    1
    0
    5
    5
    37
    
    
    38-«i
    
    SAMPLING POINT-WELL NO OR EXACT LOCATION
    MN 1
    MAILING NAME AND AOORESS
    Noranda Lakeshore Mines, Inc.
    P.O. Box C-6
    Casa Grande, AZ 85222
    SAMPLE APPEARANCE
    X
    Clear
    
    Turbid
    
    Other Icommentl
    WATER SUPPLY
    SOURCE
    X
    Well
    
    Surface
    SAMPLER'S COMMENTS OR INSTRUCTIONS
    SAMPLE TYPE CODEI
    C - Chach Samp!*
    0 - Ragular Olatrlbutlon
    Stmplt
    P • Plint Tip Simp's
    R - Rt« W|(ir
    S - Sptclal Simpla
    CONTAMINANT
    CODE
    1
    0
    0
    5
    1
    O
    1
    0
    1
    0
    1
    5
    1
    0
    2
    0
    1
    0
    2
    5
    1
    O
    3
    O
    1
    0
    3
    5
    1
    O
    4
    0
    1
    O
    4
    5
    1
    O
    5
    0
    1
    9
    2
    7
    1
    0
    1
    6
    1
    0
    1
    7
    1
    O
    2
    2
    1
    9
    1
    5
    1
    0
    2
    8
    1
    O
    3
    1
    1
    0
    3
    2
    1
    9
    2
    5
    1
    0
    5
    2
    1
    O
    5
    5
    1
    9
    3
    O
    1
    0
    9
    5
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    •
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    10-11
    COMMENTS
    ANALYSIS
    METHOD
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    7
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    3
    1
    0
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    9
    1
    0
    1
    1
    4
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    O
    1
    1
    0
    1
    1
    3
    5
    1
    0
    1
    1
    3
    7
    1
    3
    9
    1
    0
    1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CONTAMINANT
    NAME
    IMCL)
    ANALYSIS
    RESULTS lmg/1)
    Arsenic
    Barium
    Cadmium
    Chromium
    Fluoride
    Lead
    Mercury
    Nitrates INI
    Selenium
    Silver
    Alkalinity
    Calcium
    Chloride
    Copper
    Hardness
    Iron
    PH
    Sodium
    Sulfate
    TPS
    Zinc
    Nickel
    10.051
    ll.l
    10.0101
    10.051
    11.4-2.01
    10.05)
    .0021
    110.
    10.011
    10.05!
    Magnesium
    Manganese
    Chromium VI
    Mass Balance
    <0.02
    <0.5
    <0.005
    <0.02
    0.6
    <0.02
    <0.001
    2.0
    <0.01
    <0.02
    176
    25
    51.
    <0.05
    120.
    <0.1
    14.
    <0.05
    7.9
    87,
    35
    374.
    <0.05
    <0.1
    <0.05
    TTOb
    17 20
    Reviewed by
    mm
    EXCEEDS
    Puriutnl ta R9-8-223
    (leek tifupld an
    RE0UIRED f»r ANY
    and ALL C0RtimiflftM(i)
    In th« atciadi
    column.
    IB!
    c
    IaIiW
    ODE
    
    
    
    :s 30
    ANALYSIS OATE
    Mo 1 Day
    Yr
    0
    612
    6
    8
    6
    22 27
    CJC
    ANALYST
    [5-234]
    

    -------
    DRINKING WATER QUALITY
    INORGANIC CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORTING FORM
    fl fi 0 5 7 8 0		Be/ore comoletmg. please read instructions on reverse side		5/29/86
    SPECIMEN no	0&TE r6c 0
    	NOTE: WATER SYSTEM MUST COMPLETE ALL BLANKS INSIDE THIS BOX	
    PWS 10 NO
    O |4
    
    
    
    
    
    1 7
    LAB NAME AND AOORESS ^ 0
    O
    0
    1 O
    
    42-46
    WESTERN TECHNOLOGIES, INC
    
    
    
    3737 East Broadway Road
    
    
    
    P.O.Box 21387
    
    
    
    Phoenix, Arizona 85036
    
    
    
    SAMPLE DATE
    Mo
    Oay
    Yr
    0
    5
    2
    8
    8
    6
    3i
    SAMPLE
    Type
    
    Tim# (Hr» )
    D
    1
    0
    4 0
    37	38-*'
    WATER SYSTEM NAME
    SAMPLING POINT-WELL NO OR EXACT LOCATION
    MN 2
    MAILING NAME AND AOORESS
    Noranda Lakeshore Mines, Inc.
    P.O. Box C-6
    Casa Grande, AZ 85222
    SAMPLER'S COMMENTS OR INSTRUCTIONS
    SAMPLE APPEARANCE
    X
    Clear
    
    Turbid
    
    Other Icomment 1
    WATER SUPPLY
    SOUBCE
    X
    Well
    
    Surface
    'SAMPLE TYPE COOES
    C - Chtck
    0 - Rifulir Oliiributloft
    S 4 mpli
    P - Pl»nt Tip Stnpli
    R - Ri» Witir St^oli
    S - Sp«ci»l S*mpi«
    CONTAMINANT
    COMMENTS
    ANALYSIS
    CONTAMINANT
    
    CODE
    
    METHOO
    NAME
    (MCL)
    1
    0
    O
    5
    
    1
    0
    1
    
    Arsenic
    [0.05I
    1
    0
    1
    0
    
    1
    0
    1
    
    Barium
    11.1
    1
    0
    1
    5
    
    1
    0
    1
    
    Cadmium
    10.0101
    1
    0
    2
    O
    
    1
    0
    1
    
    Chromium
    [0.051
    1
    0
    2
    5
    
    1
    0
    7
    
    Fluoride
    11.4-2.0|
    1
    0
    3
    0
    
    1
    0
    1
    
    Lead
    10.051
    1
    0
    3
    5
    
    1
    0
    3
    
    Mercury
    [.0021
    1
    0
    4
    0
    
    1
    0
    9
    
    Nitrates INI
    110.1
    1
    0
    4
    5
    
    1
    0
    1
    
    Selenium
    10.011
    1
    0
    5
    0
    
    1
    0
    1
    
    Silver
    [0.051
    1
    9
    2
    7
    
    1
    4
    9
    
    Alkalinity
    1
    0
    1
    6
    
    1
    0
    1
    
    Calcium
    1
    0
    1
    7
    
    1
    4
    9
    
    Chloride
    1
    0
    2
    2
    
    1
    0
    1
    
    Copper
    1
    9
    1
    5
    
    1
    4
    1
    
    Hardness
    1
    O
    2
    8
    
    1
    0
    1
    
    Iron
    1
    O
    3
    1
    
    1
    0
    1
    
    Magnesium
    1
    O
    3
    2
    
    1
    O
    1
    
    Manganese
    1
    9
    2
    5
    
    1
    3
    5
    
    PH
    1
    O
    5
    2
    
    1
    0
    1
    
    Sodium
    1
    O
    5
    5
    
    1
    3
    7
    
    Sulfate
    1
    9
    3
    O
    
    1
    3
    9
    
    TDS
    1
    O
    9
    5
    
    1
    0
    1
    
    Zinc
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Nickel
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Chromium
    VI
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Mass Balance
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    ANALYSIS
    RESULTS (mg/ll
    <0.02
    <0.5
    <0.005
    <0.02
    0.4
    <0.02
    <0 .001
    1.9
    <0 .01
    <0.02
    228
    97
    57.
    <0.05
    440 .
    <0.1
    48 .
    <0.05
    7.6
    165 .
    440 .
    1090
    <0.05
    <0.1
    <0.05
    1.03
    Reviewed by	<2Q4zt>_ A/rvir?t i
    mm	U
    EXCEEDS
    Punuift ta R9-8-223
    thrck jimoln in
    RCOUinCO for ANY
    »nd ALL COM • nlnt nt( i)
    CMcVid In (hi ncitdi
    C olwnn
    10
    r
    SAhON
    onp
    
    1
    ANALYSIS DATE
    Mo
    Oay
    Yr
    0
    6
    2
    6
    8
    6
    22 ?7
    CJC
    analyst
    [5-235]
    

    -------
    NORANDA LAKESHORE AT A GLANCE
    Location:
    Slate Mountains
    28 miles South-Southwest of Casa Grande,
    70 miles South of Phoenix, Az.
    60 miles Northwest of Tucson, Az.
    Elevation:
    1900 feet above sea level
    Ecosystem:
    Average Temperature Range:
    (1979 records)
    Typical Sonoran Desert
    53° Low
    87° High
    Annual Precipitation:
    8 inches
    Property:
    Ownership:
    10,500 acres
    Leased from The Papago Indian Tribe
    by Noranda Lakeshore Mines, Inc.
    Operator:
    Work Force:
    Mining Method:
    Ore Treatment:
    Noranda Lakeshore Mines, Inc.
    300'people
    Underground - Block Cave
    Hydrometal1urgical
    Planned Production:
    5000 'tons/day Oxide Mine
    -1-
    [5-
    

    -------
    
    (LAKESHORE STOCK)
    FCET
    1000
    _J
    Tf
    Tcriiory
    Fanglomcrale
    Tgdp
    _aromidc
    Granodiorite
    Tgd
    Laromido
    Graiiodiorite
    Kict
    Crctoccous Volconic and
    Scdimonlory Rocks
    p- pCls
    Paleozoic— Precombrion
    Limeslonc {Toclile)
    pCrfb
    'rccombrion Diabase
    pCod
    Precombrion Dripping
    Spring Quorlziie
    iniHlii] Enriched Oxido Ore
    777777
    j.
    ill'
    -rzr*
    a • *
    Chalcocilo Oro
    Tactile Oro
    Thick Sulfide Oro
    GENERALIZED ECONOMIC CROSS SECTION, LAKESHORE MINE, ARI7.0
    [5-2 37
    Fig. 1
    — T —
    

    -------
    f EMPLOYEE
    PftRKlHG
    ^TORCE^ - i
    i\iK>Tnfi i U"
    VISITOR
    ', PARKING
    
    ©
    3$>
    k©?§ES
    ttf|R^°OEStW«|0R
    „3s»««"""
    •'^oraftda La\-esh0
    

    -------
    NORANDA LAKESHORE MINES INC.
    FIGURE 1.
    ISOMETRIC OF MINING OPERATION PRTOR TO TN STTII TFAPHTNn
    cn
    I
    ro
    w
    CD
    ISOMCTfMC LAHGt SCALE DETAIL
    Q» Oi.ot —4 ««!»	20 •
    9 ftlKI Ml MIU	aiM> 21- •
    0» Oa>»< 4 HUM* NIK 11-I
    V	U»M M'M »•!* ft IOO uuol ••Ilia	KIMk It-1
    O* KuriM MMl Ml Htia	Ml Mk 19- •
    Of	IM»«' ft INtHH NIK	¦•Ma- 22-A
    w WW«fO« CauW* ft COaoliM lOII*	MIM« I53 D KXX)
    V	too Kill M» I# ma	HIMM 12- A ... .
    ISOMETRIC OF
    UNDERGROUND MINE
    DEVELOPMENT
    NORANDA
    LAKESHORE MINT
    w*. J9w faA A -OftT
    H K 7—7
    

    -------
    NORANDA LAKESHORE MINES INC.
    FIGURE 2.
    VIEW OF SUBSIDENCE AREA RESULTING FROM BLOCK
    CAVE MINING OPERATION
    SUBSIDENCE OJTLINE
    
    DEVELOPMENT COMPOSITE
    UNDERGROUND MINE
    NORANDA
    

    -------
    NORANDA LAKESHORE MINES INC.
    FIGURE 3.
    WELL COMPLETION DIAGRAM OF A TYPICAL SOLUTION DISTRIBUTION WELL
    LEACH FIELD FEED
    80 FLUSH JOINT PVC PIPE
    4.0" I.D. SCH 80 PVC PIPE
    CEMENTED INTO THE SURFACE 3-4 FEET
    SURFACE
    BARREN AND BROKEN
    TERTIARY FANGLOMERATE
    OVERBURDEN
    r»i
    5.125" OPEN DRILL HOLE WITH PVC
    DISTRIBUTION PIPE FREE STANDING IN THE
    HOLE		-	
    MINERALIZED ZONE WHICH CONTAINS COPPEF
    SLOTS OR HOLES FOR
    SOLUTION DISTRIBUTION
    < -~v
    COLLECTION SUMP FOR
    COPPER BEARING SOLUTJQiN
    PIPING TO UNDERGROi
    PUMPS.
    [5-2411
    

    -------
    11UKANUA LAMtSllUKC. MINES 1N(J
    FIGURE U.
    BARREN ACID SOLUTIONS
    y FROM SOLVENT EXTRACTION
    PLANT
    COPPER BEARING
    SOLUTIONS TO SOLVENT
    EXTRACTION PLANT
    DISTRIBUTION WELLS
    O
    THIS IS AN ISOMETRIC DIAGRAM
    OF THE IN SITU SOLUTION MINING
    OPERATION
    COLLECTION
    DRIFTS
    UNDERGROUND PUMP STATION
    COLLECTION DAN
    

    -------
    NORANDA LAKESHORE MINES INC.
    FIGURE 4A.
    PICTORAL DIAGRAM OF SURFACE SUBSIDENCE
    7
    SURFACE SUBSIDENCE AREA
    SOLUTION DISTRIBU
    WELLS
    COPPER BEARING LEACH SOLUTE ,
    TO SURFACE OPERATIONS b'Q-
    UNBROKEN TERTIARY
    FANGLOMERATE
    BROKEN FANGLOMERATE
    RESULTING FROM THE
    MINING OPERATION
    UNBROKEN ORE
    BEARING ZONE
    BROKEN ORE RESULTING
    FROM THE MINING OPERATIOI
    UNDERGROUND COLLECTION
    SUMPS FOR THE COPPER
    BEARING SOLUTIONS
    

    -------
    NORANDA LAKESHORE MINES INC.
    hl&U^e A B
    PHOTOGRAPH OF A SET OF TYPICAL DISTRIBUTION WELLS IN THE
    SUBSIDENCE ZONE.
    

    -------
    NORANDA LAKES110RE MINES INC.
    FIGURE 5.
    PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM OF THE IN SITU SOLUTION MINING AND SOLUTION
    PROCESSING
    LEACH FIELD
    vf " 11
    PREGNANT LEACH SOLUTIONSl
    TO STORAGE TANKS	'•
    STORAGE TANKS
    COPPER BEARING LEACH
    SOLUTIONS FROM UNDERGROUND
    PUMP STATIONS
    PREGNANT ELECTROLYTE TO
    '-STORAGE TANK
    COPPER BARREN SOLUTIONS FROM THE
    // SOLVENT EXTRACTION PLANT
    93% SULFURIC ACID TO
    THE BARREN STREAM
    COPPER BARREN SOLUTIONS
    TO STORAGE TANKS
    PREGNANT LEACH
    SOLUTIONS TO THE
    SOLVENT EXTRACTION
    PLANT
    SOLVENT EXTRACTION
    PLANT
    PREGNANT ELECTRO/
    STORAGE TO THE
    ELECTROWINNING
    PLANT
    ELECTROWINNING
    PLANT
    1
    SPENT ELECTROLYTE FROM THE
    ELECTROWINNING PLANT TO THE
    SOLVENT EXTRACTION PLANT
    -V-
    99.99% COPPER CATHODE
    TO MARKET
    

    -------
    Section 5.3
    In Situ Fossil Fuel Recovery Wells Supporting Data
    [5-246]
    

    -------
    SECTION 5.3.1
    TITLE OF STUDY:	Organic Groundwater Contaminants
    (OR SOURCE OF INFORMATION) From Underground Coal
    Gasification (UCG)
    AUTHOR:	Mattox and Humenick, University
    (OR INVESTIGATOR)	of Texas
    DATE:	19 80
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION: Texas, USEPA Region VI
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:	Underground Coal Gasification
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES: The purpose of this research is to identify
    and quantify organic compounds that could contaminate groundwater
    in the vicinity of in situ gasification of Texas lignite.
    Through field sampling, the extent of groundwater contamination
    at selected sites was found to be a function of the contaminants'
    solubility in water.
    Conclusions of this study were:
    1.	In field samples obtained at two sites, phenolic materials
    were shown to be predominant groundwater pollutants. Lesser
    amounts of polynuclear and heterocyclic aromatic
    hydrocarbons v/ere identified.
    2.	There may be substantial capacity for natural groundwater
    renovation following UCG. Adsorption on coal is a likely
    mechanism for immobilization of organics in groundwater.
    3.	Although large amounts of PNA are produced during UCG, their
    potential for groundwater pollution is probably limited by
    their water solubility.
    4.	The condensed produced water is similar in composition to
    groundwater sampled from the burn cavity.
    5.	Most comprehensive study of tar and water condensates is
    needed to predict water solubilities of organics released to
    groundwater during gasification.
    [5-247]
    

    -------
    in situ. '.(2). I29-IS1 (l«)HO)
    OKCANM t.K< K;NI)UA I t K ( ON"! AM 1 NAN'I h K(>M IK (.
    C. K. M.ilti'x i ml M. J. Iliim.ni.k
    Knv 1 r immi ii l 11 H<¦.11 t I¦ I n^, [ n< < r i nj*
    l'li. 1'n I v« t •. 1 r v . >1 11 \ i
    \ 11 •. I III, I I X . I ¦. / ' t / I
    AHM'HAt 1
    .In | >u rpoMf of tills rese.irt Ii is to I <1 en I I ! \ .mil <|ii.inl I I v t lie
    , uiii i orapoundt> thai could conlumlnate groundvat er« in the
    ¦niiv of ln-sl Cu gasification ot Texus lignite. Kiel J sample*.
    • niiilw.iter Jrd ahovc ground condensate and tar I mm two . 11 •-*.
    i. wore analyzed l>v ga.s i liroiaatographv-aus.s spei t ruim-i rv
    ' >. The extent of groundwater cunt.imln.it ion was found to he
    	I', function of the w.itor soluhllltv of the ori*anlis. I'lien-
    • <>m|iounds such as phenol, imlanol, naplit lio I , and ullicr alkvl
    ¦ . ii iv.-s comprised most of t hi' organ us In tin- burn i jvii v
    ¦ • . •	1'olvnuclear aromatic livd roi arbons (I".A) wi rr pri sent i"
    l.'w i unucnt rat ions cunsl.stent with their sn 1 ul> 1! I l ies . PSA's
    : >> live condensed rings, including ben^of a | pyrene, were
    i m the pph levels. Hased on limited sampling, water qu.il U \
    • trod CO Improve over a one v»-ar period alter gasil Uat ion
    iiinns were completed at a field test site.
    • ¦ ¦. i riiifi
    "lule underground coal gasification (UCl.) Mas inherent envlr-
    ¦ ui it advantages compared Co conventional lon'.i-rslon technolo-
    . t lu-re are areas of environmental concern jnuh need to !)e
    • 'i-iied. One such concern is che potential contamination ot
    ' "n.luater In the vicinity of UCC operations. The objective of
    1 research is to determine and evaluate the nature of ground-
    "• r pollution by organic compounds released to groundwater.
    129
    P* ¦ inilt J I 
    -------
    130
    MATTOX AND HUM KM <
    Field samples of groundwater from two lignite gas IfLcation
    situs In Texas were analyzed by gas chromatography - mass spi'itr..
    metrv (KOMS) to Llentifv and quantlfv a variecv of organic poll ,
    l.inls. In addition to gruundwat c*r, samples uf above ground iopiI,
    sate (t.ir and water) ui-ru analyzed.
    I.XH .UJJJ/; I AI
    Samplc Descript ion
    Samples of groundwater, condensed product water, and conden .
    product tar were obtained from two separate UC.f¦ operations in l< * i
    Two groundwater samples were takn at a slic near lair! ield, !'i * i
    These s.imples were taken dlrectlv from the burn t av 1 ty -diurtl . i
    the i i">sai Inn nl nasltUatlon (ITS I AiH .mil > >ne vi-ar later ( I i "¦ I >
    I lie nmaining samp 1es wi ft oil t a l ned : r. m a i »ml . l I i neai i < i •'
    C o I inn , I i'X.ih . Samples were obtained during the npi-r u inn ;'h i ¦
    of the project. A baseline groundwater sample (FOI'J) from the
    Tennessee Colony site will bo um?d Co compare water quality helm-
    and after g.m I f leal Inn. Two Mumples of the prodiu l water ((.ond.n ¦
    above ground) were analyzed. The first (Wnier-I) was sampled in
    Septeraher 1 'J 7 H nnil the second (Water-.!) In l.niu.iry 17 . A •..nn|i
    111 |>ro(l III eil tar (Tar-I) wan t/lkeii l( the 'lame I I mi- .is [lie '»i * I'M
    w.iler 'lamp le. A -it-ioud t ir samp It ( I a r - .' ) u.r. oh ( a I m il in I- < t • i
    I'l/'l while KasllvinK willi oxvKen.
    Analvtlial I'eihnirjueH
    Two I UlTh of water were extracted with npprox i ma t e 1 v I'll) ml
    methylene ihlorlde In a I'unt InuouN solvent extractor (KIk. I), i
    nample wiin adjusted Co pH ^ 12 with NaOII and extracted tor .i|>|>r>>-
    Imately Ifi bourn, then acidified to pit J with IK! I and ex: r.u i ¦'
    another Jh hours. The extruct vum concentrated in one to five -i > .
    depending on the concentration of organic s. In a KinTer ill-Dan I •. 11
    concentrator. The extract wan analyzed by (Kl-MS t
    -------
    (WATER CONTAMINANTS
    131
    COOLING
    WATER
    WATER
    SAMPLE
    SOLVENT
    Figure I. Continuous Solvent Extractor
    ¥ ¦ample** were dlauolved In methylene chloride and analyzed
    ilftctly by GC-MS.
    Volatile organic* In water were unulyzed by purge and trap
    IliChod acrurdlng to KPA protocol (I). A five ml Humple wan purged
    With helium, volatile organlcw and were adsorbed onto tVnnx ('.(!, a
    ^TBth«t Ic rciln, and were thermally demirhcd Into tin- Inlet of the
    ih* system.
    JfeHS Analysts
    Coapound ncparatlon and Identification for all nnalyncH ex-
    I
    volatile* wan performed on a Flnnegan 4000 CC-MS, with I NCOS
    ! r
    W« ay ¦ tea. The volatile analysis wan performed on a llevlet
    JSWtard 59H2A OC-MS, with operational parameter* ani>rdlng to EPA
    [5-250]
    

    -------
    132
    MATTOX AND HUMEMi >
    prococol (1). The Finnegan system emploved a glass capillarv u'lmi
    (.25 mm x 30 m) coated with SP-2100 for chromatographic separation.
    For quantitation of organics, the sample was Lnjected in Che ->pl it-
    Less mode and the column was temperature programmed from 50° to
    at 5°C/rain. Slower rates of programming (2°/min) were used in tin
    Initial ph.isos of work to provide maximum chromatographic scp.ir i-
    tlun and aid in identification of poorlv resolved peaks. The r.i
    spci troraeter .scanned masses 50 to 300 everv two seconds.
    Ideally, the identIflcatIon of a compound Is h.iscd on tin-
    equivalence of retention time and mass spectrum of the sample .m.i
    pure standard. About 50 percent of the compounds were i d e n 111 11 • I
    in this manner. The remaining compounds, for which standards w.i.
    not .ivailable, were identified by comparison with mass spert r.i .n.>l
    retention indices published in the literature.
    Quantitation was performed by the addition of an intern.il si m
    dard (usually d ^Q-anchracene) to the extract and by mass chrom.it mi
    raphv of a prominent ion (mass) in the compounds' spectrum.
    C • —L_ c - -A.
    RF IS ais
    (	- concentration of the organic compound In t lu»
    extract, ppo
    ( j«j • concentration of Internal standard In the
    extract (usuully 20 ppm)
    KK » roHponxf Imtor, .i Liinit.ini « h.ir.w t» r I si 11
    of the organic compound
    A - area of the nasii chroma tog ram of the organ lc
    compound
    - area of the ma*** chroaatograa of the Internal
    Mtnndard (maa« 188 for d ^Q-ant hracenc)
    The above method permit® quantitation of two (or more) comix-mi l
    which are not chromutographlral I y resolved, aw long ,m they iont.nn
    at lram one unique maxa In their spectrum. RrsponMi* factors wt-r.
    [5-251]
    

    -------
    QbOUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS
    133
    itcermined from available standards when possible, and estimated
    vticn scandards weren'c available.
    Ltboracorv Procedures
    A recovery study of model compounds was used to evaluate the
    efficiency of the analytical technique. Approximately 20 compounds
    la i methanol soluLlon were added to two liters of distilled uatf
    lod extr.ii.Ltd in exactlv the same procedure .is the water s.impl. s.
    Th« compounds were representative of those tound in actual ..iter
    Maples.
    A laboratory studv was designed to determine the cju 11 ihriua
    diltribution of organic^ between tar and water phases. Ten grains of
    T«r-1 were added to a liter of tap wacer and stirred for 24 hours at
    TOO* temperature. The wacer was filtered through 0.2 u membrane f11-
    t«rs to remove all colloidal oil and provide a definition for solu-
    bility. The wacer sample was then analyzed for orRjnlcs.
    M3ULTS AND j) LSCU_S_S H)N
    hcowcy St tid IcH
    The «-f I W leticy and limitations of the anulytUnl techniques .ire
    Vcflacted In the results of recovery studies as surawir I/ed In Table I.
    With the	Ion <>f phenol .uid benzonitr 1 Ic, jll < nrapoumls were
    r^coveri'd with .K I nisi HO peri vnt efflelemy I rnm illsilllid w.it er
    la concentrations t rum ') pph to 20 ppn. Since these recoveries 1 If
    Within the ntcuracy of (KJ-MS techniques (about + 20Z In t tie |>ph
    r«ng«), ail livd roenrbon* are aHaumed to be quantitatively i-xtr.u trd.
    fat«r noluble, polar compound* are not quantitatively extracted
    fro* water by thin technique. Phenol watt the none soluble coopnund
    Mud ltd ir»d won only 47 percent recovered. Recoveries of vnrlourt
    Blkyl phenoln, however, were nanlafactory. The »oncentrat Ion of
    lpb«nol In laonc of the water sampled wan Mufflclent to permit dlre«c
    •qtaoun una 1 vm Is . tliun eliminating Che extraction priuedure.
    [5-252]
    

    -------
    134
    MATTOX AND HlfMEN TTk
    Compound
    TABLE 1.
    Recovery of Model Organic Compounds
    Amount Added
    Pheno L
    o-Cresol
    1.5-\vlonol
    p-(tert-Butyl)-phenol
    p-(tert-Butyl)-o-cresol
    '} IndJiiul
    1 -N.iplit lu> I
    I'vrMI no
    (Ju I no I i ne
    An i1lne
    Bcnzon11 r Lle
    Indent-
    2-Mt*t liy 1-naphthalene
    B IphenvI
    Accn.ipht ht-nt*
    Ant. Iirm riu-
    ( .i r h.i.'D 11'
    I) 1 lien/. | .i. h I ( y r cne
    20 ppm
    20
    20
    10
    10
    0.1
    0. I
    0.05
    0.05
    0.005
    0.005
    0.005
    0.005
    Pe r<- fiit
    Recovfr. :
    47;
    91
    8*
    101
    <)H
    I 11)
    'Hi
    8 J
    8/
    M h
    b\
    99
    !()'>
    inn
    liv.
    <10
    <)(,
    Hh
    HH
    Cruuiulwiti cf Ana ly * In
    Ki i iniHi rm ti»U Ion chrooatonraoiH (RIC) of Kroiuidw.iifr sumi'l--'
    t rum .i burn luvity are shown In Figure 2. Groundwater ITSIAU w.i .
    tnkfii Wiort lv after gas production wax terminated, while ground
    water TTSIA1 wan sampled from the sane well one year l.itor.
    <^unc 11 "
    Tub 11- 2.
    Thr urganlca Initially released are prlaarlly phenol U-h, wtM<
    losser nmountu of PNA's. There appears to be substantial loprnv.
    [5-253]
    

    -------
    00OHDVATER CONTAMINANTS
    135
    »	• «	i;
    no
    •oo
    i«oo V
    jj. jo r
    a. oo
    m
    J*-
    
    J*
    
    A.«
    laia
    Figure 2.
    Cograon of (.round Uatvr Sanple*, Postman1flrat Ion - I IS1 AO
    , 0n« Year Later - TTSlA (Middle). PrejjjiH I f lent Ion - TCP 3 (Botton)
    [5-254]
    

    -------
    MATTHX AND lU'MtM. .
    ti.t
    Covpoflanc
    CrauBdMaor Groundwater	Groundwater
    •(Car on* <««r	before
    gaalflcacion *(iar	|iit! u«<
    (eel! Icac Ion
    .WKTHA^CXl '0 jpa	:	ppt :
    c. - Mjrr. :)	:
    c, - ALrr. *	ta	id
    vo	»o	¦©
    -]
    »;p«evc.	i	•©	"pft *	5?o .
    iwrWiTwr.L.T	: ?pa	ID	T>
    AC^ix/KTVior	)	3 ?p6	. ?ph
    .) •	«	<0	«
    ruoion	J	«	><0
    c, - *unr.	xo	'®	xo
    phciaxtkkc.i	11	:	xc
    AXT KJLAC Dit	J	IB	ID
    c, ¦ vltt.	'3	to	•a
    0. - *i-m.	«	w	<0
    ( , - kLtrt.	•	«	"TD
    r-rru. i »l>«c rm • :: ppi>	^ ppb
    runujcxiM	.	mo	»
    MtCNt	1	is	<:A>T>auti>t	j	o	«)
    c( - *um.	®	mo	*a
    c, - wjm.	*0	*
    rmju. t tine nu'i 7 ,?»
    imzoiairntcn	1 «	»
    iccjrntot	«	«>
    ivxaxi
    total 11*. nu •	t p»t> 10	»
    TOTAL •	1*0 ppfr It ppD	1
    [5-255]
    

    -------
    CJOUNDUATER CONTAMINANTS
    Ortalc fro(U«« of Crouodvacir SiagUi
    Ca*$oncoi
    Croundw«c«r
    • f: tr
    !• • iLett ion
    Cmndvxtr
    on» ««ar
    «f nr
    leal ion
    CrmadvAt tr
    )i(3n
    moL
    S2 wm
    01S fvm
    001 pp.
    ct - w-m.
    
    30*
    001
    Cj - uin
    11
    00-
    301
    Cj - vLrr.
    1 .
    ao*
    so
    c4 - Aira
    o a
    so
    so
    obajmu
    l 9
    so
    >®
    Cj - Aunr.
    : ¦>
    
    SO
    Cj - *UTT.
    i j
    «0
    so
    u/mtoLS
    0 )1
    «
    so
    Cj - Jj.rr.
    0 ))
    so
    *0
    Cj - ALtn.
    0 01
    IS
    KB
    TOTAL nineties
    100 ppa
    o: po-
    00r pp.
    mo mi
    100 pp6
    rn
    *0
    urn msnu
    **0
    ¦e
    n
    mim
    t:
    «
    *
    nomriat
    •
    SO
    so
    «aoi:n
    wo
    KD
    *0
    Atm. QUBOLimi
    ))u
    *0
    ID
    OBDLS
    HO
    *0
    SD
    CJU1AJ0LZ
    I
    m
    SO
    mocannu*
    It
    Ot
    

    -------
    138
    MATTOX AND HUM F.N I ( K
    ment in uater qualitv over a year's time, particularly with regar.l
    Co phenolic compounds. Unfortunately, documentation of the samp Im,
    metiiod and pumping history of the wells is not available. For com-
    parison, limited data from Hoe Creek indicate significant differ-
    ences in organic concentrations in a well sampled before and after
    pumping (2). However, if the sample analyses shown in Figure ?. I s
    representative of groundwater quality, then the improvement is un-
    parable to that observed at the Hoi- Creek (3) and mav be attribute!
    to adsorption, blot hernial amviTsmn, or some other mechanism.
    The UK of .1 groundwater sample In Loncact with lignite pri m
    to gas I f li_at I on, (TLIM) is .i 1 so shown in Figure 2 and quantified
    in Table 2. This sample is representative of the natural water inn
    taminatlon by lignite and will ho used for comparison to post
    flcatlon groundwater quality.
    Tar Analyses
    The RIC of two condensed tar samples are shown In Figure 3.
    Tar was produced during air naslflcatlon and T.ir II was pro-
    duced during oxygen gasification. (Quantitation of these samples
    Is summarized in Tuble 3. Approximately f>0 percent of the oil
    could he accounted for as I'NA's, phenol It's, het uroc vt_ I I c compound •• .
    and aliphatic li vdrot urbons. Water and nonvolatile compounds whlili
    are not amenable to (— MS .ire probably present In slgnlf leant qu.m
    titles. I'NA's of up to five i ondensed rings, Ini luding ben/.o(a|-
    pyrene, were Idenlll led. Higher order PNA'm are probably present
    hut ar<- <1111 11 a 11 to iii.i I , t I) v (.( -MS .
    Kqu 11 1 b_r l_urn I)Isi r IIhit_lon of Tar_ OrjjanJc_H
    The UK! of water In equilibrium with Tar I Is shown In Figure •
    and In quantified In Table **. The aqueous organic* are primarily
    phenolic (93 percent) while phenols constitute only 7 1/2 percent
    of the Car, which reflects the high solublllcy of phenols compared
    to PNA. Heavier PNA (four to five rings) occur In water at concen-
    trations near their solubility, while lighter PNA iuncentrat Ions .u •
    [5-257]
    

    -------
    u
    ft?
    C7I
    I
    w
    in
    CD
    3M	fM	«M	|0M	1200	1400	SCAN
    MS	d7»	»<#•	2* «0	l)iN	tO;to	U to	lira
    Figure 3. Chromatograos of Condenbed Produce Tars. Tar I (Top) Produced During
    Air Gasification, Tar II (Bottom) Produced During Oxygi-n Gasification.
    K
    >
    -i
    m
    70
    r>
    o
    z
    H
    2
    £
    u>
    vO
    

    -------
    MATTOX AND HUMhNU
    Tajli
    Coveonanc	Tar I	T*>
    NAfWIKALtf:
    >0t
    ft j
    0. - AU-TL
    
    .
    c, - w.rr.
    ¦ »
    .
    Cj - *Ltn
    i i
    
    - C»T.
    t>7
    *;
    iifKC.T.
    :¦»
    :s
    c. - *j.rr.
    305
    i>4
    Tcrr-u. ; *l.hc rw •
    » " z
    • .:
    ACDUJ'HTtOr.C.Vt
    0 s<»
    *D
    ALCUfHTKEH
    
    ; i
    c. - ALcr.
    u
    li
    nljurjc
    il
    4 I
    ct - urn
    .34
    
    rwc».cmai>i
    ' 1
    1 •
    *.'.7 KJLu. LN t
    4J
    sc
    l. ¦ *j.rr.
    n
    : l
    t. - *im
    5*
    »•
    C ^ " ALtTL
    4«
    ;4
    roTA». i *t\r. r\A •
    * OX
    • 9
    * « *
    n L'ORAKTHINf
    10
    
    fTIUM
    ?n
    * i
    ' i - KLtn
    il
    j*
    t. . - MJ.TL
    ^ ¦
    i*
    c!«r. c( r / »cc *.-c >oui. o» r
    
    ;n
    < . - u.m
    :o
    i
    f , - A4.HI"
    3/*
    i i
    total <• m:u ^ha' •
    J ot
    ; o:
    ICCOI »|r«TUNt	j;	OO*
    IC-THPTlDHr !S.>K£*S	15	1.
    totw. \ itxc nu •	n:	m
    totm. ru' •	i* x	10
    [5-259]
    

    -------
    gjQUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS
    lil
    frofllii o( Condmtd Product Tc(M
    IM • tot Mfliwrtd
    [5-260]
    

    -------
    MATTOX AND HUMFN!r k
    i)
    14
    lie
    I
    I
    (
    ' I
    v
    200
    1.41
    t
    «c_
    •K
    to
    >o
    Figure 4.
    Chromatograms of Water Equilibrated With Tar (Top), CondeniteU l'n>
    -------
    I^BDWATER CONTAMINANTS	143
    Jggf than saturated. The water concentration of each phenolic species
    proportional to the tar concentration. In fact, all phenolics have
    ;iaacely the same distribution coefficient between the tar and
    phases (¦ 620 rag phenols in oll/mg phenols in water) as shown
    £l Figure 5.
    flBtf«naed
    Product Water Analyses
    The RIC of two condensed product water samples jro also shown
    fa re 4 and Jre quantified In Table 4. The profile of nr^.mu
    ^¦pounds In these samples la very similar to that of die burn
    *nrlty groundwater Immediately after gasification. (See Figure 2).
    the phenolic profiles of the condensed water jre different
    (ACQ Chat of the water equilibrated with tar (Table 4). Phenol is
    predominant phenolic compound in the condensed waters (and burn
    MVlCy groundwater), with decreasing amounts of heavier phenolics
    •OCOrding to their molecular weight (and solubility). This
    JfcLatlonshlp Is demonstrated in Figure 6.
    The water equilibrated with tar in the laboratory contained only
    ttaor concent r.it Ions of phenol compared to water samplen t.iken In
    tin field. These tarn have probably been stripped of lighter phenolic
    tMpounda by contact with water prior to sampling. However, the tar
    water condrnsutes were sampled In the field at sepurate times and
    WKJ not have been In equilibrium or contact together. A more coo-
    yVChanilve sampling and analysis program Is needed to resolve this
    (Ration.
    Volatile i ompounds measured in condensed water 11 by a purge and
    VYtp technique are sumurized in Table 5.
    Ai volatile orgnnlrs appear to be minor components of the nm-
    laitd water. Perhaps these compounds are not efficiently con-
    tend and arc retained In the product gas.
    Major CC peaks in all the sampled analyzed (Figures 2, 3, 4
    .{fed 7) are identified in Table b.
    [5-262]
    

    -------
    MATTOX AND HI Ml \ .
    Coapontnt
    Uat m r Lp
    Equi Hsr j
    wit 1 Tir .
    Cond«fll«d
    ?roduc;
    4*t$r :
    %. jnu*i
    «• i ~
    WfHA-CU
    11 jp5
    "¦ ?pto
    • «*
    C, - A-*"'.
    .60
    10
    »
    C. - ukT.
    2'-0
    s
    
    Cj -
    C. •
    sipmlvy-.
    I'
    10
    
    -
    C. - AIKTl
    s
    ¦©
    *!»
    roTAi : *: c ru >
    b#0 jpo
    
    
    ACSU/THYt.E.Nt
    IS
    2
    
    ACClAftOint
    < 1
    10
    -
    c, - Aj^m.
    'TO
    •
    
    ni'OKDt
    •8
    *
    
    Cj • Atrn,
    IS
    >
    Xj
    rHCK*XTK*C.l
    no
    
    
    A..THJWtCM
    • 'i
    
    
    • AL»TT.
    
    ;
    *
    v. . • ALkT!
    •
    ; »
    r..'!*A.wTMc.i
    1.
    i
    
    rrtc i
    1 1
    •
    
    l, • 
    m
    
    oarscvC u.v:a.vt)om:c
    -------
    ttteBJNATER CONTAMINANTS
    145
    trtllla* of ConrfvoMd Product U«car Saplai
    la tqulllSrlu* with T«r
    
    W«nr In
    Equlllbrlua
    wif> T«r t
    produce
    W«(«r I
    Cand*n*«d
    produce
    u*t«r !I
    • uxn
    I - PPM
    d 0
    )50 pp«
    98
    )fl
    r«j • AIXTL
    1 5
    40
    19
    •,-uxr.
    «i - iijm.
    i:
    • s
    6 0
    k 5
    * 3
    0
    n—
    6 5
    5 9
    0 56
    jf| . Ufll
    i:
    6 I
    o ?:
    C, - »U7l
    : l
    8 0
    0 i*
    f| • tuu
    1, - am
    i—
    n
    1.6
    10
    :.4
    3.64
    o i:
    Mu rasuLics
    80 ?P«
    M0 ppa
    116 Pf»
    Vuon
    I.' PPO
    :so p»&
    PP6
    AM miBtns
    1100
    100
    *00
    aooi
    :o
    >0
    :o
    ¦¦OIU
    :
    *0
    •
    fmaii
    l ;r>o
    *10
    150
    'Ml « dchscs
    noo
    • 10
    60
    Bti
    ^ ;i>
    so
    100
    SMtULX
    DO
    <«0
    100
    taaaorjiAn
    :»
    
    10
    MBBoniona^r
    : i
    :o
    i:
    Mu intio-
    RCUCS
    I ppb
    .'«*•> ?pt»
    10O) ?vt<
    Uitrtc rreto
    MM
    1
    1
    i
    l
    1 f
    1
    A
    ¦ai uxz ens
    
    MM
    MM
    S
    ¦."0
    *
    16 ?[<•
    Wu OtCANlC^
    86 ffm
    i>: »»•
    11 ' ?V*
    K> • Not 3
    -------
    146
    MATTOX AND HUXKNKk
    oPHENOLS
    oiNOANOLS
    X
    4
    Z
    4-
    0
    2 4 6 3 10 12 14 16
    pprn IN WATER EXTRACT Of OIL
    Figure 5. Equilibrium Distribution of Organics Between Tar An.!
    Water Phases.
    30
    * »
    Ui
    •
    O 3'
    M
    X
    a
    2
    O
    I
    •PHENOLS
    oiNOANOLS
    »NAPHTHOLS
    90 100 120 MO MO
    MOLECULAR WEIGHT
    UK
    Figure 6. Relationship of Molecular Weight of Phenolic Material"
    to Concentration In Condensed Water.
    [5-265]
    

    -------
    TABLE 5
    Concencration of Volatile Organics in Condensed Water II.
    jund	Concentration, ppb
    NM
    NM
    280
    NM
    3
    83
    3
    31
    2
    'ID
    l«n« Chloride (laboratory contaminant)
    ydrofuran
    yTtldehyde?
    I^ephane
    low
    ^jjqrlb«ar ene
    f-
    'B • Not Detected
    • Not Measured
    tZC of this analysis is shown In Figure 7.
    M IM IM tm IM N« )M M 'M >00 »M M*	rm tot
    |Mi« 7. Chromatogram of Volatile Organic Compounds In Condensed Water II.
    [5-266]
    

    -------
    148	MATTOX AND HUMFN11 v
    I AIM I
    (!lu mm.iI 1 npli If	(	tit .1111
    rp.ik Nt».
    I	TmI-II m..
    /	} f \c t h V I p V r ' 'M i"*
    \	I Plrl li V I i»y r 111 I III* Hul
    M< f h v 11* y r I <1 11ir*
    '•	I , Alft*yf|tyil«llnn
    *	I III »• t t»i I ^ I ni«I 11 •!
    (il |r|ili»|i»f.r»i»7'Mic)
    u	I
    /	lll|iv» «i| iihI J* I i rii»|
    III	( j A I U y I | I
    I	I	N.»plt» li i I rui- /iii'l * ^ A I W \ I |• I	 i
    17	i' j All v I |>l i**n* • I
    II	I ^ A I W y I |i|ifii«* I
    I '•	t | A I li y I |>li(aH<» I
    I **	n«*u a* i
    -------
    IATER CONTAMINANTS
    i-atlon ¦ «( Mulur I lirnw.it n|»r | | lilfl III!'
    II nr ,
    )0	I'ltI lin I il i' rsl ri
    SI	ii r.i • <•'< in**
    II
    31	II- I f 1, MM 1111 *
    )4	It I'lMll I'MlllP
    w	A 1 11*1 ii11 lr Ivvilt "i irl*«Hf
    14	n	iin.iur
    1?	li	.1* • ••Mill*
    M	Al nt imm*
    M»*t Ii v	( It 11•« lil«*
    { Irtl'Of M«»ry rrml	)
    40
    link HHWM
    b
    M	I • • I • ill V»l « «¦ t Ml .III
    W	ii U
    -------
    150
    MATTOX AND HUMKNKi
    CONCLUSIONS
    L. In field samples taken at two lignite gasification sites in
    Texas, phenolic materials (phenols, indanols, and napht Ik> I j
    were shown cu lie predominant groundwater polLutants. L« • • . i
    amounts of polynuclear and heterocyclic aromatic hydro-
    carbons were also Identified.
    2.	There may be substantial capacity for natural groundvatir
    renovation following UCC. Adsorption on coal is a I 1 k *.* I v
    mechanism for Imnob1llzation of organlcs In groundwater.
    Other possible mechanisms can also be proposed.
    3.	Analysis of condensed product tar indicates a large amount
    of PNA are produced during gasification, however their pi>i . n
    tial for groundwater pollution Is probably limited by Mir Ir
    water solubility.
    4.	The condensed product water, while more concentrated in
    phenols. Is similar in composition to groundwater sampled
    from die burn cavity.
    5.	More comprehensive study of tar .ind water condensates 1 s
    needed Co predict water solubilities of organlcs relenHeil
    to groundwater during gasification.
    At KNuwi.U)_(;h?ihJrrs
    The authors gratefully acknowledge the Department of Knt-rK' "•
    Basic ReHOiiries, Inc. who funded thin work. Furthermore, this u<'iv
    would not h.ive been possible without the ijh*.- of the CC-MS svit>"'.
    and cooperation which wiin generouttly provided by Dr. James 			
    Department of ChemlHtry, University of Texu* at Austin. Appret I i
    t ion Ih exprenned to .Jerry Parr, Radian Corporation, Auac In, • •
    who ran the volatile anulvnls.
    [5-269J
    

    -------
    PDOHDWATER CONTAMINANTS
    151
    jyntENCES
    ^ "Sampling and Analysis Procedures for Screening of Industrial
    Effluents for Priority Pollutants," U.S. Environmental Pro-
    tection Agency, April, 1977.
    4, E.O. Pellizzari, "Identification of Components of Energy-
    Related Wastes and Effluents" EPA report, EPA 600/7-78-Of)^»,
    Jan.. 1978.
    |, J.H. Campbell, E.D. Pellizzari, and S. Santor, "Results of
    • Groundwater Quality Study Near an Underground Coal Caslt i-
    catlon Experiment (Hoe Creek I)" prepared by Lawrence
    Llvermore Laboratories for the U.S. Department of Energy,
    under contract no. W-7405-eng-48, Feb., 1978.
    [5-270]
    

    -------
    SECTION 5.3.2
    TITLE OF STUDY:	"Underground Coal Gasification
    (OR SOURCE OF INFORMATION) (Experimental Technology),"
    Assessment of Class V Injection
    Wells in the State of Wyoming
    AUTHOR:	Western Water Companies
    (OR INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:	September 1986
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION: U.S. Department of Energy
    Hanna area (Hanna Basin of
    Southcentral Wyoming)
    USEPA Region VIII
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:	Coal Gasification
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES: Only four areas in Wyoming contain
    Underground Coal Gasification (UCG) experiments. The Hanna area
    was selected for a site assessment because it is a well
    documented UCB experimental area. A coal bed within the Tertiary
    Hanna formation (Hanna #1 coal bed) was utilized for che
    experiment.
    The Hanna research facility consisted of five separate burn sites
    controlled from a central area. Seven gasification experiments
    were made using different well patterns, involving approximacely
    30 wells used either as injection or gas-recovery wells.
    Injected materials were limited to water, steam, air, oxygen, and
    propane.
    Contaminants of concern are those produced by subsurface
    combustion of coal and the postburn leaching of the ash and
    spalled residue in the burn cavity. These contaminants include
    ammonia, boron, phenols, and sulfide. Other contaminants
    potentially present in trace quantities are complex organic
    compounds such as polynuclear aromatics, polycyclic organic
    chemicals, and thiols.
    The Hanna #1 coal aquifer has suffered adverse impacts as a
    result of in situ coal gasification experiments. Contamination
    by a variety of organic pyrolysis product chemicals and elevated
    concentrations of ionic species native to groundwater have been
    demonstrated. The operator has made no efforts to restore
    groundwater quality.
    [5-271]
    

    -------
    CHAPTER 8
    UNDERGROUND COAL GASIFICATION (Experimental Technology)
    Introduction
    Selection of Assessment Site
    Since only four areas in Wyoming contain Underground Coal
    Gasification (UCG) experiments, all four were considered for this
    assessment. Two of the sites, ARCO's Rocky Hill #1 Area, and the DOE
    Hoe Creek area, are located in the Powder River Basin. Rocky Hill is 40
    miles south of Gillette, Wyoming in Section 16, T44N, R71W. Hoe Creek
    is 20 miles south of Gillette, in section 7, 142N, R72W. The Hoe Creek
    site was dropped from consideration because of complications in
    evaluating the area since subsidence to the surface occurred after
    gasification. Two coal seams and an overlying aquifer contain waters
    which became intermixed after subsidence, and the resulting data have
    lesser meaning than data from other UCG experiments. The Rocky Hill =1
    site was eliminated from consideration because much detailed information
    is still considered proprietary and is unavailable for this assessment.
    Two sites in the south-central part of Wyoming were considered for
    assessment. They were the steeply-dipping bed (SD8) project, conducted
    on the west flanks of the Rawlins Uplift 4 miles west of Rawlins,
    Wyoming and operated by Gulf Research and Development Company, and the
    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Hanna area where a series of UCG
    experiments were conducted over a six-year period. The SDB area was
    rejected because it is devoid of subsurface aquifers which could be
    231
    [5-272]
    

    -------
    contaminated by UCG development. The Hanna area was selected for site
    assessment because it is a wel 1-documented UCG experimental area and
    information is available for assessing injection results. Figure 8-1 is
    a location map of the Hanna UCG area and the specific experimental
    sites.
    Geology
    Regional Geology
    The Hanna UCG area is in the southeastern portion of the Hanna
    Basin. The Hanna basin of southcentral Wyoming is one of the deepest in
    the intermountain region. It is 40 miles long by 25 miles wide, and
    contains a sedimentary section that exceeds 30,000 feet in thickness.
    Structure
    The Hanna Basin and adjacent Carbon Basin are bounded by
    Lararmde-aged uplifts: the Rawlins Uplift to the west, Medicine Bow
    Mountains to the south, the Saddleback Hills to the east, and the
    freezeout, Seminoe, and Shirley Mountains to the north. Numerous normal
    faults occur across the coal-bearing synclines of the basin. These
    faults trend northwest-southeast with cross-faulting common. Faults
    often occur quite closely together and vertical displacements vary from
    a few feet to several hundred feet. Zones of closely-spaced fractures
    are sometimes associated with these faults.
    232
    [5-273]
    

    -------
    I " 'T| _*• 7
    .	tfinoovif
    'Poou»|.-|.
    sT ' ./''*os-
    Slirtnli*
    llanna
    Hin« Omtltc.
    
    SuDu»
    Hanna Junction
    /Sl>nuy
    Hanna IV
    . t~WHanna I
    ^pfHanna II~
    Hanna III
    /O/J
    Figure 8-1. Hanna UC6 R&D License Area and Experimental Sites (from
    WDEQ Files).
    233
    [5-274]
    

    -------
    Stratigraphy
    Ihree formations deposited during the development of the Hanna
    Basin are recognized in this region. These include the Upper Cretaceous
    Medicine Bow, Paleocene Ferris, and Paleocene-Eocene (Tertiary) Hanna
    Formations. Aggregate thickness of these deposits is approximately
    21,000 ft. Each was deposited in the subsiding Hanna Basin in
    continental environments including alluvial fan, fluvial, and swamp
    settings. Coal beds are common in all three 1ithologic units, and many
    have been extensively exploited by both underground and strip mining
    (Glass, 1972; Glass and Roberts, 1980).
    Site Geology
    Structure
    The experimental area is located southwest of the structural axis
    of the Hanna Basin. Rock units strike northwest and dip to the
    northeast at an average of 3°. Normal faults at the test site with
    displacements up to 50 feet disrupt the strata as illustrated by the
    Structural Contour Map and the cross-section shown on Figures 8-2 and
    8-3. The fault system has created structural dips of up to 8° in part
    of the study area.
    Stratigraphy
    The Hanna UCG project utilized a coal bed in the Hanna Formation
    called the Hanna No. 1 coal bed which is 28 to 30 feet thick at the
    site. The lithology and stratigraphy of the portion of the Hanna
    234
    [5-275]
    

    -------
    LU	
    6600
    CHI 33
    30\ 29
    T22N. R81V/
    CONTOUR INTERVAL =
    50 FEET
    • CH133 Core Hole Location
    SCALE
    60O
    1200 FEET
    ieo
    J60 METERS
    and Number
    { X i Area of Burn I
    FAULT.
    DOWNTHROWN SlOG
    ELEVATION
    IN FEET msl
    "6700
    Figure 8-2.Structural contour map on top of the Hanna No. 1 coal bed
    (after Youngberg et al., 1981). Note: structural contours in
    feet above sea level. SW-NE line is surface trace of cross
    section shown in Figure 3-3.
    235
    [5-273]
    

    -------
    CHI3 4
    CHI33
    CHI 31
    FCCT METERS
    .6860
    30
    100
    6760 u
    60
    200
    6660
    90
    300
    SCALE
    ZOO
    6560 2
    120
    Cl 400
    400 rccr
    120
    500
    MANNA NO.I COAL
    ¦ 6360
    ieo
    600
    210
    16260
    700
    A, B, C, D = Lithologic Units Shown on Figure 6-4.
    Figure 8-3. Generallzed northeast-southwest structural cross section of the Manna UCG area (after
    Craig et al., 1902). (Location of section shown on Figure 0-2.
    cn
    I
    ro
    ->1
    

    -------
    Formation within which the experiment was conducted is shown on Figure
    8-4.
    Hydroqeoloqy
    In 1980 a field program to evaluate the hydrogeology of the sites
    was begun. Twenty-two wells were completed as monitor wells and four
    holes were cored and geophysically logged. From this and previous core
    information, three aquifers were identified at the site: the upper
    overburden aquifer (unit C, Figure 8-3), the lower overburden aquifer
    (unit A, Figure 8-3), and the Hanna No. 1 coal seam aquifer (unit ,
    Figure 8-3).
    Structures within the upper overburden aquifer are primarily trough
    and planar crossbedding. These deposits are poorly to moderately
    sorted, with a mean grain size of 0.41 mm. The aquifer ranges in
    thickness from 0 feet at the outcrop area to 242 feet thick to the
    north.
    The lower overburden aquifer ranges in thickness from 26 feet at
    the southeast corner of the study area to 100 feet at the Hanna II,
    Phases 2 and 3 site. This aquifer is separated from the Hanna No. 1
    coal bed by 1 to 19 feet of shale.
    The Hanna No. 1 coal seam aquifer was deposited in a swamp
    environment where peat accumulated and formed coal. This swamp was
    prone to overbank contamination which formed carbonaceous shales within
    the coal bed when sediment from the fluvial system inundated the swamps.
    The Hanna No. 1 coal seam is 22 to 34 feet thick at the gasification
    area and dips to the northeast (Schowengerdt, 1985).
    237
    [5-278]
    

    -------
    DEPTH
    ft.
    o-
    30-
    100"
    CO ISO-
    o
    V
    c
    k.
    o
    u
    o
    z
    200-
    230-
    300-
    LITHOLOGY LITHOLOGIC UNITS
    AND	AND
    STRUCTURES INTERPRETATIONS
    
    
    
    
    UPPER
    Cf* MEANDERING RIVER
    AND FLOODPLAIN
    mmrna
    C* 8RAI0E0 RIVER
    c
    o
    KJ
    CO
    330-
    400-
    O
    - 450-
    I—
    300-
    
    LOWER
    B MEANDERING RIVER
    AND FLOODPLAIN
    LACUSTRINE DELTA
    AND LACUSTRINE
    530-
    HANNA NO.I COAL
    Figure 8-4. Subdivision of the overburden of the Hanna	No. 1 coal bed
    at the Hanna UCG site (after Craig et a 1. ,	1982k *- Not
    present at Hanna UCG III *- Not present at	Hanna UCG II
    or Hanna UCG IV.
    238
    [5-279]
    

    -------
    Ground-Water Flow
    Pre-gasification data, although scarce, are available for
    comparison to post-gasification data. A preburn potentiometric surface
    map of the Hanna No. 1 coal seam is presented in Figure 8-5. In
    developing this figure, emphasis was placed on perimeter wells furthest
    from the burn site. The Hanna No. 1 coal potentiometric surface
    represents a flow pattern towards the north-northwest with apparent
    major recharge from outcrop areas and a possible minor recharge
    component from leakage of overlying strata.
    Directional permeability measurements show three maximum trends,
    and the resultant vector of directional permeability is interpreted to
    be approximately N 30° E. Table 8-1 summarizes other hydraulic
    parameters for the three aquifers.
    Ground-Water Quality
    The water-quality monitoring program at the Hanna site proceeded in
    two major phases. Phase 1 included the preburn baseline and early
    postburn sampling at Hanna III during 1977 and 1978.
    In 1977, a monitoring program was established for the Hanna III
    field test, including a limited-duration baseline sampling period.
    Sporadic collection of data at the remaining experimental sites
    continued through this period. The second phase of sampling occurred on
    a quarterly basis throughout the site from September 1980 to December
    1982. Average concentrations of ground-water constituents obtained
    during the 1977 period are listed in Table 8-2.
    239
    [5-280]
    

    -------
    UMOI9CIOWMO COM
    CaUKaHOn IUC64
    IUIM 0(U6M«llOM
    UOK5N COMII
    OUAtlll COtM<|
    MAMMA «l COM
    iQuHH HOMnOCMC
    UCC IUIN
    IVI
    CIOJ41 -III MliCMAltOM
    m uvfi (UvAii
    in. muj
    roruntowrrtie iu«'*a
    CO«towttn muj
    UCC *«>•
    tUlM Ul
    UCC IUKN II
    PMAJII
    MAMNA UNCH6IOUNO COAl GAllHCAftQN JJTI
    niN. iiiw. CAiton counrr. wtomihc
    Prtburn Pot«nfiom*tr«c Surfoce, Hannc X] Coo! Aquifer
    Figure 8-5. Preburn Potentiometric Surface, Hanna No. 1 Coal Aquifer
    (from Schowengerdt, 1985).
    240
    [5-281]
    

    -------
    Table 8-1. Hydraulic Properties of Aquifers at the Hanna UC6 Site (after Youngberg and Santoro, 1981; and
    Schowengerdt, 1984).
    Aquifer
    Porosi ty
    Storage
    Coefficient
    Average
    Hydraulic
    Conductivi ty
    (ft/day)
    Average
    Transmissivity
    (ft /day)
    Average
    Ground-Water
    Veloci ty
    (ft/year)
    Upper Overburden
    0.19
    0.003
    0.037 (0.024 - 0.048) 4.3 (2.4 - 7.6)	1.6 (0.2 - 2.9)
    Lower Overburden
    0.15
    0.003 0.012 (0.0016 - 0.027) 0.63 (0.06 - 1.6) 3.2 (0.3 - 8.1)
    Hanna No. 1 Coal
    0.03
    0.001
    0.03 (0.0011 - 0.16) 0.84 (0.019 - 7.8) 110 (0.23 - 393)
    

    -------
    Table 8-2. Hanna III Water Quality Baseline.
    llanfta III Water Quality Baseline
    Parameter
    Overburden
    Aquifer
    Coal Aquifer
    Average
    Concentration1'
    Number of
    2 Samples
    Average
    Concentration1'2
    Number of
    Samples
    ptl (standard units)
    8.OB
    12
    8.63
    30
    Water Temperature (°C)3
    10
    
    10
    
    Total Dissolved Solids
    2,561
    12
    1,223
    30
    Sodium
    1 , 107
    12
    510
    30
    Bicarbonate
    1 ,679
    12
    1,106
    30
    Sulfate
    677
    12
    19
    28
    Sulfide
    -
    »
    a
    •«
    *
    Ammonia-Nitrogen
    1.66
    12
    1. 15
    30
    Boron
    0.07
    12
    0. OA
    18
    Fluoride
    1.22
    12
    1.86
    30
    Manganese
    0.27
    12
    0.08
    30
    Phenols
    --
    --
    --
    
    Total Organic Carbon
    14
    12
    41
    30
    1 All values in rag/1, unless otherwise specified.
    2 All averages based on values reported above the detection limit. (1977 Data)
    3 Reported as 50°F (10°C) by downwell thermocouples.
    * All values were reported below the detection limit or not detectable.
    i
    ro
    09
    u
    

    -------
    Ground-Water Use
    Ground waters in the general area are used for municipal water
    supply, stock watering, and industrial purposes. Table 8-3 lists the
    water well permits registered with the Wyoming State Engineer which
    exist within approximately 1.5 miles of the permit area. These wells
    are shown on Figure 8-6 which gives their location and use. The
    location and volume of use of the municipal well for Hanna is not listed
    on the permit (Wyoming State Engineer). The principal industrial use is
    for placing a slurry of water and sand into an abandoned coal mine to
    prevent subsidence, using water from a water-filled void in that mine.
    Description of Facilities and Operational History
    The Hanna UCG research facilities consisted of five separate burn
    sites controlled from a central area. Seven gasification experiments
    were made using a variety of well patterns and involving approximately
    30 wells used as either injection or gas-recovery wells.
    Figures 8-7 and 8-8 show examples of the patterns of wells involved
    in underground coal gasification of the Hanna No. 1 coal bed (CovelI et
    al., 1980). The series of experiments were chronologically designated
    as Hanna I through Hanna IV, and were developed from March 1973 through
    September 1979. For this report, attention has been focused on the
    Hanna III site because of its goal of measuring water quality effects of
    UCG in the coal seam and in an underlying aquifer. Two injection wells
    (1 and 2) shown on Figure 8-7 were spaced 60 feet apart and were aligned
    along the major fracture direction. Twelve observation wells were
    completed, four (wells 3, 4, 5, and 14) in the overlying aquifer and
    243
    [5-284]
    

    -------
    Yield
    (gpm)
    0
    0
    0
    10
    0
    125
    25
    0
    0
    0
    3-4
    25
    on
    Table 8-3. Water Well Permits Within a 1.5 mile Radius of the DOE Hanna UCG Permit Boundaries.
    Permi t
    Number	Location	Owner	Use	Depth	Water Level
    (S-T-R)	(ft) (ft below surface)
    68966
    NE/NW
    18
    22N
    81W
    Midwest Mining
    MON
    400
    --
    69232
    NW/NE
    18
    22N
    81W
    Midwest Mining
    MON
    100
    —
    68967
    NE/NW
    18
    22N
    81W
    Midwest Mining
    MON
    300
    --
    49243
    NW/NW
    18
    22N
    81W
    J. Linden
    STO
    125
    —
    69233
    NW/NE
    19
    22N
    81W
    Midwest Mining
    MON
    408
    115
    71818
    SE/NW
    19
    22N
    81W
    McMurray Company
    1ND
    150
    --
    71819
    NE/NW
    19
    22N
    81W
    Eby Mine Company
    IND
    100
    --
    37156
    SE/SW
    31
    22N
    81W
    Arch Minerals
    MON
    140
    —
    37157
    SE/SW
    31
    22N
    81W
    Arc!) Minerals
    MON
    260
    --
    59634
    NW/NE
    32
    22N
    81W
    Arch Minerals
    MON
    210
    23.5
    37158
    SE/SE
    33
    22N
    81W
    Arch Minerals
    MON
    120
    flowing
    

    -------
    T. 22 N
    R. 82 W.
    49243
    )3
    25
    36
    R. 81 W.
    ^ ^6^966
    68967 69233
    18
    30
    HANNAv
    UCG Tk
    LEASE
    J/
    37156
    S
    37157
    71819.
    69232
    >71810
    19
    29
    59634
    32
    20
    28
    33
    37158 0
    T. 21 N
    NOTE Town of Honna - municipal well at unspecified
    location in Section 19 above
    N
    £" X PLAN £ T ION
    
    ^69232 WELL LOCATION AND
    PERMIT NUMBER
    0
    	1	
    I Mile
    j
    SCALE
    FIGURE 8-6 LOCATIONS OF PERMITTED WATER WELLS NEAR
    THE HANNA UCG PROJECT AREA
    245
    [5-286]
    

    -------
    T	•'
    I	01
    :|s	0#	01
    I
    I	o*	on
    J.	oi •» °*
    o*«
    Figure 8-7.Wei 1 Pattern for Hanna III
    arianaboa of fr«ctur» lyimw
    HANNA
    HANNA 118
    • 16
    • #
    • U
    50 100 ft
    Sow
    Flffure3-3 Hanna Well Pattern
    246
    [5-287]
    

    -------
    eight (wells 6-13) in the coal seam. Injection wells were completed
    using high temperature-cement as exhibited in Figure 8-9. Observation
    wells were constructed as shown in Figure 8-10, and high temperature
    cement was not used.
    Since 1974, various ground-water observation wells were installed,
    culminating in 1980 with a group of 22 new monitoring wells; 14 in the
    Hanna I coal seam, 4 in the upper overburden aquifer, and 4 in the lower
    burden aquifer. In all, sampling and testing was conducted in 31 wells.
    Figure 8-11 shows the locations of all observation wells used for
    hydrological evaluation over the life of the experiments. Each new well
    was cased with 5-inch steel pipe and left open hole throughout the
    entire aquifer.
    Upon completion of the gasification experiments, most of the
    buildings and all of the surface installations were dismantled and
    moved. However, one building and all monitor wells were left intact.
    Restoration of the land-surface was completed.
    Past and Present Ground-Water Impacts
    Ground-Water Flow
    A postburn potentiometric surface was developed for the Hanna No. 1
    coal aquifer to evaluate the progress of water level recovery in the
    burn cavities after the Hanna III experiment. Figure 8-12 presents the
    water-level distribution at the Hanna site for August 15, 1983. The
    general trend closely resembles the pre-burn potentiometric surface
    (Figure 8-6) with one exception. The aquifer exhibits a cone of
    247
    [5-288]
    

    -------
    >ttjA*ACC
    TZ
    -mocc ir oi«.
    •ccmcmv.ttpcc
    tlmcA* ^uct
    CAtiic . u)r.
    «• *Vi-
    COM. SCAM
    7//////A
    1ZZ
    Figure 8-9. Typical Production or Injection Well Completion,
    Hanna IV Area (from WDEQ Files).
    0' (SunfACCI
    « iXH stMi. Casing
    ar its reef actwccn
    00 r TOM Qf % IMCM C A3 IMC
    • 200 *MT
    * inch srttu casimc
    * INCH Oia STCFL SCRCCN,
    - 20 scor m.2tj reef,
    > j7*-m fmt. ocvtuo^to
    . usif« aim jerriMQ tcchnioucs
    239' (TOP Of C0A4.)
    2M* (BOTTOM Of COM.
    SfML PLAfC wtLOEO OA CM)
    Figure 8-10. Typical Monitoring Well Completion, Hanna IV Area (from
    WDEQ Files).	^	[5-289]
    

    -------
    XS»TB
    OVB 137
    VCB0 1S2	^
    10 "Ap* .OVB 140
    il. '^'CBOUS
    -8* OW22\*^®® 147
    fl-2^ ^^2-2
    ow 20-. <—Vn-i
    3 I V'iVa
    H2-» n.4\
    PERMIT AREA BOUNDARY
    LOWER OVD
    • UPPfH OVB
    Figure 8-11. Locations of l-Jells Sampled for Water Quality, 1974 - 1983 (from WDEQ Files).
    

    -------
    4 cso.«w
    *OJ
    IUIN I
    CtO.143
    ^ClO-UJ
    X(U T9
    11.23
    £10.14 J
    *111
    UCC iuin it
    :.3
    CIOJ47
    V
    WQJ
    CIO-m
    4 J
    ucc IUIN a
    MAW 1
    IICINQ
    UM(K«C«OUmO COM
    6AJMIOIIOM IVCC)
    UtflNl
    W(n MUC*ullO"
    SIOlOM COINll
    OW4IIU CO«N(«
    MAMM* «> CO*t
    «Ow«Hl mOmiIOIimC
    «lu
    CIO.I4] Will OUiCf«4ltOM
    wAfit livii iijv*r«ON
    in mm
    fn< 1WM*C1
    CO«*(OU< (*I MUI
    mamna unougcouno coai gasi'icaiiom m
    T22N. tnw CAtiON COUNTT WTQMIHC
    8/15/U3 Porentio«n«lric Surface, Hanno £1 Coal Aqutf«r.
    Figure 8-12. 8/15/83 Potentiometric Surface, Hanna No. 1 Coal Aquifer
    (from Schowerigerdt, 1985).
    250
    [5-291]
    

    -------
    depression adjacent to the Hanna II burn, indicating that the aquifer
    recovering from that experiment.
    Water Quality
    The materials injected into the subsurface in UCG experiments are
    limited to
    6^€SWiTiamts^Pt3^u,ced^as^j)rycalvsasr-produ(its,^and-^exam3ned;ra't,-ithe--'.iH anna-*
    ¦ s;i±8"^jaTO^U^^TiTOiibM'a^^bwm^^h^ftoTs^tfnd^so^T#id^. Dissolution of
    Teachable materials from the coal ash and overburden materials after the
    experimental burn creates elevated concentrations of most major ionic
    constituents and some transition or heavy metals. The leachate products
    monitored at the Hanna site include bicarbonate, fluoride, manganese,
    sodium, sulfate, total dissolved solids, and total organic carbon. It
    should be noted that these are not the only contaminants which are
    likely to be released from in situ coal gasification cavities.
    rog ram-, pe ®
    ^i^et^^^ncsstE^PePs, i n c 1 u cfe difliaptex3aa&r^aTmr^a^Bgun^gHo^aK'^g;y
    sra(.RNA&A • cpoigfc^^(^^r^iiij^cbemiC34s:»(P00sK -mST®
    sStfitor^. Ihese3Xb^caJ-fcai»£ofteS^^few^^o^sE2^§^i.tarsK2arjd.-io 1 Is"
    -wfagffag«^CTf?^W4-t>^fabOYP^on«md^£^V^asTiid3ca^km.^f3. i t ias. They can
    render water unfit for domestic use even when present in small
    concentrations, due to the tastes and odors which they impart. Many of
    these chemicals also are significant health threats when ingested in low
    concentrations over long periods of time.
    251
    [5-292]
    

    -------
    The initial post-gasification sampling phase began in June 1978,
    approximately 1 year after gasification, when water samples were
    obtained from 11 of the original 14 wells at Hanna III. Sampling
    continued through November 1978, with eight sets of samples collected.
    The second sampling phase began in September 1980, when samples were
    collected from 3 wells at Hanna III, and from approximately 30
    additional wells throughout the site. This phase continued through
    December 1982, with a total of 10 samples collected on a quarterly
    basis (Cooke and Oliver, 1985).
    Pyrolysis Products
    Postburn data from the process and burn cavity wells display
    dramatic evidence of the release of pyro'l.ys-is^-p'roduc-t? -{¦su^f-rde,''
    into the ground water by the UCG
    process (Table 8-4). Sulfide concentrations over 10 mg/L are common,
    with most values reported over 4 mg/L. Ammonia concentrations increased
    sharply immediately after gasification, from less than 5 mg/L to over 25
    mg/L. Concentrations then decreased gradually to near baseline
    conditions.
    Phenols were initially detected in burn cavity waters much later
    than the other pyrolysis products. The earlier experiments presently
    show the greatest concentrations of phenols (over 100 ug/L, compared to
    a 10 ug/L background), while the more recent experiments exhibit only
    moderate or no increases. At this time, it is difficult to determine
    the rate of decline of phenol concentrations in burn-cavity waters.
    252
    [5-293]
    

    -------
    Table 8-4. Summary of Comparison of Preburn and Postburn Ground-Water Quality Parameters at the Hanna UCG
    Site3.
    Leachate Indicators
    Preburn Concentration Postburn Concentration
    Coal	Overburden
    (mg/L)	(mg/L)	(mg/L)
    Comments
    ro
    ui
    C*J
    Total Dissolved Solids
    Sulfate
    Bicarbonate
    Sodium
    Manganese
    Fluoride
    Total Organic Carbon
    1,220
    19
    1,100
    510
    0.08
    1.86
    41
    2,560
    680
    1,680
    1,100
    0.27
    1.22
    14
    3,000 - 5,000
    400 - 3,500
    100 - 1,700
    800 - 1,200
    0.3 - 1.0
    7 - 50
    20
    Slow Increase after burn
    ended, remains well above
    baseline.
    Gradual increase after
    burn, then slow decrease
    began 1J years after burn.
    Derived from gypsum
    dissolution.
    Initial increase to 1,700
    mg/L, then rapid decline
    to below preburn values
    (approximately 700 mg/L).
    Slow increase after burn.
    Sharp increase. Trace
    constituent in coal.
    Gradual decrease to less
    than 10 mg/L except at
    one site.
    Decrease in burn-cavity
    waters, no change away
    from burn cavity.
    on
    I
    ro
    
    -------
    Table 8-4. Summary of Comparison of Preburn and Postburn Ground-Water Quality Parameters at the Hanna UC6
    Site3 (cont'd).
    Pyrolysis Products
    Preburn Concentration
    Coal	Overburden
    (nig/L)	(mg/L)
    Postburn Concentration
    (mg/L)
    Comments
    Boron
    SulfIde
    ro
    cn
    -P»
    Ammonia-Ni trogen
    Phenols
    0.04
    ND
    1.15
    <0.01
    0.07
    ND
    1.66
    <0.01
    1 - 5
    0.1 - <10
    5 - 35
    <0.1
    3 Based on values presented by Schowengerdt (1985)
    ND = Not Detected.
    Sharp rise, then gradual
    decrease to 1 to 2 mg/L.
    Major trace element in
    coal.
    Sharp rise several months
    after burn, sustained peak,
    then rapid decrease to
    low (0.1 mg/L) value.
    Sharp increase, then
    gradual decrease to
    baseline concentrations
    in coal and 20 mg/L in
    overburden.
    Concentration rise shown
    well after burn, rate
    of subsequent decrease
    undetermined.
    Ol
    i
    ro
    
    -------
    Well 111-4,	but
    afterward exposed to a burn cavity by overburden subsidence, also showed
    the impact of pyrolysis products of gasification. Evidence of boron
    contamination was less dramatic in this overburden well than in those of
    the coal aquifer, reaching concentrations of only 500 micrograms per
    liter (ug/L) and then decreasing to Hanna III baseline values. Sulfide
    concentrations increased to above 10 mg/L, as in the coal aquifer, and
    remained elevated. Ammoma concentrations increased gradually from
    approximately 2 mg/L to over 35 mg/L and were last reported (1982) to
    have decreased to approximately 20 mg/L. Postburn data for phenols are
    inconclusive.
    Leachate Products
    Preburn and postburn leachate indicator parameters in ground-water
    samples from the Hanna III site are summarized in Table 8-4. The
    postburn concentration of total dissolved solids in the burn cavity
    ground waters increased from a preburn average of about 1,200 mg/L to a
    postburn average of 3,000 mg/L, with maximum concentrations of over
    5,000 mg/L attained at Well Hanna 111-7. After gasification,
    concentrations continued to increase slowly. Concentrations in the
    Hanna III wells remained above baseline when last reported in 1982.
    Sulfate concentrations increased from a level of less than 50 mg/L
    to as high as 3,500 mg/L in Hanna 111-7. Most other monitored wells
    exhibited a gradual increase in sulfide concentration with time.
    Bicarbonate concentrations increased slightly from a baseline level
    of 1,100 mg/L to approximately 1,700 mg/L after gasification, and then
    255
    [5-296]
    

    -------
    decreased rapidly to about 700 mg/L. Sodium concentrations increased
    gradually from approximately 500 mg/L to an average of 900 mg/L. A
    maximum concentration of 1,200 mg/L was attained at Hanna 111-7.
    Manganese concentrations increased greatly after gasification to over
    1,000 ug/L.
    The ground waters also exhibited increases in fluoride
    concentrations after gasification. Well 111-7 showed an initial
    increase to 7 mg/L followed by a gradual decrease to near baseline. At
    111-2, however, early postburn fluoride concentrations were observed
    upwards of 15 mg/L. Fluoride concentration in 111-2 ground-water
    appears to have stabilized below 10 mg/L.
    The concentration of total organic carbon in the cavity ground
    waters decreased from a level of approximately 45 mg/L to an average of
    20 mg/L. All non-cavity wells showed no change in concentrations over
    time.
    Well 111-4 exhibited effects of leachate contamination similar to
    those of the wells originally completed in the coal. The total
    dissolved solids concentration of water from the well increased from
    approximately 1,900 mg/L to over 5,000 mg/L after gasification and in
    1982 remained above 4,000 mg/L. Sulfate showed no apparent increase in
    concentration, while bicarbonate concentrations declined. Sodium
    concentrations increased from approximately 900 mg/L to over 2,000 mg/L
    with the rate of increase paralleling that of total dissolved solids.
    No increase in manganese concentration was observed. Fluoride exhibited
    a slight increase in concentration after gasification, peaking sharply
    at 25 mg/L during 1981, well above the baseline level,of approximately
    256
    [5-297]
    

    -------
    1.5 mg/L. Total organic carbon increased from approximately 15 mg/L to
    a peak of nearly 100 mg/L after gasification with a subsequent gradual
    decline (Permit 1 RD).
    Plume Behavior
    To exhibit the movement of pyrolysis products throughout the entire
    Hanna site over a 19-month period, boron and phenol concentrations were
    plotted over time by Schowengerdt (1985). These plots show that the
    plumes developed in all directions from the burn sites and were
    elongated only slightly in the downgradient (northwest) direction.
    Apparently, molecular dispersion or gaseous dispersion plays as
    significant a role in short-term migration as does advective transport.
    Summary
    An analysis of the impact of UCG processes on ground waters at the
    Hanna site is impeded by several flaws in the design and execution of
    the environmental monitoring program. Paramount is the lack of baseline
    data, especially for the wells outside the immediate areas of the burns.
    These wells showed many flat concentration versus time curves, though
    often at concentrations considerably above the reported Hanna III
    baseline data. Also common were single peaks of moderate intensity on
    otherwise flat curves. The potential impact of the addition of large
    volumes of foreign waters into the burn cavities is also very difficult
    to account for in the evaluation of general water quality character.
    257
    [5-298]
    

    -------
    However, an analysis of cavity ground waters provides definitive
    qualitative evidence of the release of gaseous pyrolysis products and
    leachate development in the post-gasification environment.
    Solubi1ized pyrolysis products were found in the gasification
    cavity. Greatly elevated levels of boron, sulfide, phenols, and ammonia
    were common in the coal cavities and in the exposed overburden above
    Hanna III. Several peripheral wells also exhibited increased
    concentrations of pyrolysis products. Maximum concentrations achieved
    for individual parameters are unknown due to the lapse of time between
    the completion of each experiment and the execution of each phase of the
    sampling program.
    Increased concentrations of leachate products were ubiquitous in
    the gasification cavities. Total dissolved solids concentrations in the
    cavities rose two- to four-fold after gasification, and remain well
    above the presumed baseline. Increased concentrations of leachate
    components were also seen in several of the peripheral wells.
    Past and Present Ground-Water Impacts
    The Hanna No.l coal aquifer has suffered adverse impacts as a
    result of the Hanna in situ coal gasification experiments. The ground
    water in the aquifer has become contaminated by a variety of organic
    pyrolosis product chemicals, and elevated concentrations of ionic
    species native to the water have resulted from the exposure of char and
    ash produced by the underground gasification. The operator of the Hanna
    gasification experiment has made no known efforts at ground water
    restoration.
    258
    [5-299]
    

    -------
    At the present time, this contamination is not known to be having
    any effect upon the public health or welfare. Permitted wells
    downgradient from the experiment site are used only for monitoring
    purposes; there are no users of water from the coal aquifer in the
    area,	wate&Ls-gftaluraUauaJity nf
    Contaminant plumes have been demonstrated to be moving away from the
    gasification area, however.
    Prediction of Future Ground-VJater Impacts
    As mentioned, the Hanna site operator has made no effort to restore
    ground-water quality at the Hanna in situ coal gasification site. The
    operator may be required to make such efforts as part of future
    experiments, but it is not known if any restoration activities will be
    attempted for the purpose of removing ground-water contaminants
    resulting from past experiments. Potential future adverse environmental
    impacts resulting from the experiment are dependent upon the extent to
    which contaminants migrate to areas where they may be withdrawn by
    wells, or discharge to streams or springs.
    The movement of ground water contaminant plumes, as established by
    earlier investigators, has been discussed briefly above. Those
    investigators have made no prediction of the ultimate fate of the
    ground-water contaminants, however. Mattox and Humenick (1980)
    described ground waters in the vicinity of an experimental burn in Texas
    as experiencing attenuation of organic contaminants to near background
    levels within one year after the burn. They attributed the attenuation
    259
    [5-300]
    

    -------
    to adsorption of the organic contaminants onto the coal aquifer matrix
    and to biochemical conversion. These same mechanisms should influence
    the attenuation of organic contaminants at the Hanna site. Inorganic
    contaminants may slowly leach into the ground water for years and cause
    a very slow return to baseline conditions. Advective transport by the
    moving ground water is likely to be the most important means of
    migration, and precipitation, adsorption and ion exchange, along with
    dilution, will be the most important means of attenuation.
    Restoration Techniques
    Available aquifer-restoration techniques are limited to either
    ground-water sweeping similar to that employed at uranium ISL sites, or
    to physical containment of the burn-area ground water to prevent the
    migration of contaminants. Sweeping or flushing the area of the burn
    with ground water would entail the use of injection and recovery wells
    and above-ground treatment of the produced water prior to reinjection.
    Physical containment of the postburn ground water or isolation of the
    burn cavity and residuum from the ground-water system could entail
    conventional grout injection techniques on the periphery of the burn area
    or backfilling of the cavity with a low-permeability slurry.
    On the scale commonly involved with experimental technology Class V
    well projects, either sweeping or isolation techniques would be
    economically and technically viable, because such projects are not
    profit oriented. In large-scale commercial applications, however, where
    large areas would be subjected to gasification, restoration by
    260
    [5-301]
    

    -------
    ground-water sweeping would be the preferred alternative because the
    aquifer would be returned to a usable state rather than a nonproductive
    state as it would with the isolation alternative. The commercial
    ventures, however, would employ proven technology, and associated
    injection wells would not be covered by the Class V regulations.
    Recommendations for Mitigation of Existing Ground-Water Pollution
    It would be possible to improve the quality of ground water in the
    Hanna 1 coal aquifer, though it may not be possible to return the ground
    water to its preburn condition. A restoration program would have the
    beneficial effects of reducing the severity and areal extent of
    ground-water contamination, and reducing the likelihood that the
    contaminants may move large distances from the experimental area.
    Restoration activities would probably have to be centered on
    removing contaminated ground-water from the gasification cavities. This
    could be accomplished using existing wells into the cavities, or using
    new wells developed expressly for this purpose. Water would have to be
    produced from the wells at a rate sufficient to develop local cones of
    depression at the cavities, in order to draw contaminated waters back
    into the cavities and ultimately out of the formation.
    Hydrogeological investigations sufficient to define the appropriate
    pumping rates and locations would be necessary prior to initiation of
    pumping. It might be economically advantageous to pump contaminated
    ground water from wells outside the burn cavities, in addition to those
    in the cavities. Such wells could be located, or completed at depths so
    as to recover only the most heavily contaminated ground water.
    261
    [5-302]
    

    -------
    Consideration would have to be given to adequate treatment of the
    contaminants at the surface. The polluted ground water could be placed
    into evaporation ponds lined with impermeable membranes, or treated by
    biological and/or chemical means to remove contaminants. It could then
    discharged to the surface or reinjected into the formation to effect a
    ground-water sweep.
    Prevention of Ground-Mater Pollution at Similar Sites
    The first step needed to prevent long term ground-water pollution
    from occurring at sites similar to the Hanna in situ coal gasification
    site would be a requirement in the facility permit that ground-water
    restoration be performed. Such a requirement should be a feature of all
    permits for projects for in situ mineral recovery projects, regardless
    of size or ownership.
    Restoration requirements should, of course, be base upon
    demonstrated techniques for achievement of the required restoration. To
    this end, applicants for permits for facilities such as the Hanna
    project should be required to present laboratory or pilot-scale test
    data supporting the viability their proposed restoration schemes.
    In those situations where totally new mining and/or restoration
    technology is to be employed, WDEQ would be justified in limiting the
    size of proposed projects until restoration has been satisfactorily
    demonstrated. The agency has the authority to do this, and routinely
    does so for commercial uranium in situ mining sites.
    262
    [5-303]
    

    -------
    SECTION 5.3.3
    TITLE OF STUDY:	"Oil Shale In Situ Retorting
    (OR SOURCE OF INFORMATION) (Experimental Technology)"
    Assessment of Class V Injection
    Wells in the State of Wyoming
    AUTHOR:	Western Water Companies
    (OR INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:	September 1986
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION: Talley Energy Company Site
    (Sec. 17-T18N-R106W, Sweetwater
    County) and the DOE Rock Springs
    Site (Sec. 15-T18N-R106W,
    Sweetwater County), Wyoming
    USEPA Region VIII
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:	Oil shale retoring
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES: During a span of ten years, eleven
    experiments were conducted at the Rock Springs site. The Tipton
    shale member of the Green River Formation was the unit in which
    all in situ experiments were conducted. The lithology and
    stratigraphy of this unit are nearly interchangeable between both
    areas.
    Surface facilities consisted of air compressors, buildings
    containing control equipment, holding tanks, demisters, piping,
    wellhead, and repair and support equipment shops. Materials
    injected into the subsurface were: 1) explosives, including NGI,
    dynamite, and pelletized TNT; 2) water during hydraulic
    fracturing operations; 3) 10/20 and 6/8 mesh sand both during
    hydraulic fracturing and stemming in instrument wells; 4) propane
    for initial combustion; and 5) air injected into wells to sustain
    combustion during retorting experiments.
    Observations of water quality from USGS records indicate that
    hazardous wastes from oil shale retorting experiments are
    generally located in wells at or very near the individual sites
    and that transport of such constituents has been at a relatively
    low rate. However, this data is not entirely consistent with DOE
    monitoring well data. The present study concludes that the
    Tipton Shale aquifer has suffered adverse impacts as a result of
    experimental retorting. Contaminants present as a result of
    organic pyrolysis include phenolic and polynuclear aromatic
    compou nds.
    [5-
    

    -------
    CHAPTER 9
    OIL SHALE IN SITU RETORTING (Experimental Technology)
    Introduction
    Two oil shale in situ retort sites were considered for assessment:
    the Talley Energy Company site, in Section 17, T18N, R106W, Sweetwater
    County, and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Rock Springs site, in
    Section 15, T18N, R106W, also in Sweetwater County. Both experimental
    areas are included in the WDEQ/LQD Temporary Filing Number 1 1/222
    permit. Initial work at the DOE site began in 1969 and continued over a
    span of 10 years. Eleven experiments were conducted within section 15.
    Although a considerable amount of retorting parameter data are
    available, hydrologic data are sparse because little ground-water
    monitoring was accomplished. The available data were screened and
    reduced by Smith and Weand (1977) and their reporting was concentrated
    on sites six and nine. None of their analyses included the parameters
    of ground-water flow; instead they concentrated on water quality.
    All in situ oil shale retorting experiments were conducted in the
    Tipton Shale Member of the Green River Formation. A 40-foot zone of 22
    gallons per ton oil shale at the top of the member was the primary
    target for the research. The lithology and stratigraphy of the Tipton
    Member in both areas is nearly interchangeable (Dana and Smith, 1972),
    the principal difference being the amount of overburden. This
    assessment discusses primarily the DOE site.
    Since the Talley Energy area did conduct preliminary hydrogeologic
    investigations in the same aquifers used during the DOE experiment, some
    253
    [5-305]
    

    -------
    discussion of their results is pertinent to the DOE experimental tract.
    In 1981, 1982, and 1983 the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) undertook a
    ground water study of the general area where in situ retorting
    experiments had been conducted over a 10 year period from 1969 through
    1979. The investigation included the drilling of 15 observation wells
    by the USGS and the use of 10 existing DOE wells. Although much of the
    data have not been placed in report form, one report on leachate
    transport has been generated and accepted for publishing in June 1986
    (Glover, 1986).
    Regional Geology of the Green River Formation
    Regional Structure
    The Green River Basin is located in the southwestern portion of
    Wyoming and extends into Utah. Contained within the basin are rock
    units of the Green River Formation. These units comprise oil shale,
    marlstone, claystone, siltstone and sandstone with minor thin beds of
    limestone and tuffs, and locally thick beds of trona or trona and
    halite. All were deposited in Gosiute Lake, which occupied the region
    during Eocene times.
    The Green River Basin is an asymmetric structural basin whose
    deepest part is near the southern margin of the basin. Large scale
    faulting can be seen on the west, northeast and southern flanks of the
    basin and some small scale faulting is present southwest of Rock
    Springs. However, no faults are known to displace beds of the Green
    River Formation. In general the Green River beds are nearly flat,
    dipping less than one degree throughout the basin.
    264
    [5-306]
    

    -------
    Stratigraphy
    In most of the basin, the Green River Formation consists of the
    Tipton Shale Member, a basal oil shale unit; the Wilkins Peak beds; and
    the Laney Member, an upper oil shale and clastic unit (Culbertson,
    Smith, and Trudell, 1980). Of these, the Tipton is most important to
    this study because the in situ retorting experiments were conducted in
    its upper rich oil shale beds.
    Site Hydroqeoloqy
    The 300-acre study area is located on the eastern flank of the
    Green River Basin, the extreme western slope of the Rock Springs Uplift
    (Figure 9-1). There are 11 sites in the study area from which
    experimental data are available. Geologic data to interpret the
    geologic framework of the study area were collected from test wells at
    each site.
    Local Ground Water
    Prior to the beginning of experimental activities at the DOE Rock
    Springs site, no hydrological testing was conducted to determine
    baseline conditions. Since no evidence of springs were found in or near
    the proposed site, the ground-water content of the subsurface was
    thought to be negligible. This assumption was further supported by the
    very low porosity and permeability of the oil shale. Furthermore, no
    significant faults and few fractures to act as ground water conduits
    exist at the site except for near-surface fractures produced by
    weathering.
    265
    [5-307]
    

    -------
    Silt J ^
    Si It *
    Sin 1
    SCtU. 'Ml
    Rock Springs Exploratory Sites, Sec 15, T 18 N, R 106 W.
    Figure 9-1. Location of Oil Shale In Situ Retorting Sites Near
    Rock Springs (from WDEQ Files).
    266
    [5-308]
    

    -------
    Three aquifers were found in the upper 200 feet of the Wilkins Peak
    and Tipton Members. These three aquifers were determined to be at
    depths of between 80 to 105 feet, from 120 to 140 feet, and between 160
    and 180 feet at Site 9. Water was also found at a level of 300 feet
    from the surface at Site 6 and in a 900-foot Wasatch Formation well
    south of Site 9. Two of these aquifers lie above the oil-shale
    formation which was fractured and processed (burned). Leakage among the
    three aquifers before in situ processing of the oil shale is believed to
    have been minimal (Permit No. TFN 1 1/222).
    At the DOE site, the USGS identified one aquifer in the Tipton
    Member of the Green River Formation (Glover, 1986). The Tipton aquifer
    is an 8-foot thick sandstone in the lower Tipton. The sandstone and its
    water are confined by overlying layers of oil shale and underlying
    strata consisting of a basal Tipton limestone and upper Wasatch shales
    and mudstones.
    At the Talley Energy site, the USGS identified two aquifers; one in
    the uppermost Tipton (or lower Wilkin's Peak strata) at depths of 249 to
    273 feet (above the target production zone), and the other in the middle
    Tipton at depths of 414-442 feet (below the target production zone)
    (Permit No. TFN 1 1/222). What water exists and does move in the
    subsurface, normally moves in the downdip and/or direction of decreasing
    gradient. Since the dip of the oil shale is west to southwest, the
    formation ground water is thought to move in that direction at a
    gradient less than the dip. An exception to this may be found in
    shallow alluvium, colluvium, and the weathered/fractured uppermost
    layers of bedrock at the site. Water level measurements made after the
    first successful experiment (Site 4) produced a variety of results in
    267
    [5-309]
    

    -------
    comparatively closely spaced wells. These unconfined or semi-confined
    waters may migrate in directions other than downdip, probably towards
    local surface streambeds.
    Thompson and Davis (1976) reported the results of tests conducted
    on 5 wells at the site. The transmissivity of the units penetrated
    2	2
    ranged from 2.3 ft /day to 520 ft /day, hydraulic conductivity ranged
    -4
    from 0.01 ft/day to 5 ft/day, and storage coefficient ranged from 10
    to 10"9.
    Ground-Water Quality
    No baseline data are available for the DOE Rock Springs site
    because no hydrology studies were conducted prior to in situ retorting.
    However, studies were conducted in the same intervals at the Talley
    Energy site and water quality data are presented in Tables 9-1 and 9-2
    for the upper and lower aquifers (Permit No. TFN 1 1/222).
    In general these waters were found to be unacceptable for
    agricultural purposes due to naturally high concentrations of TDS and
    boron. In fact, the high TDS concentrations present difficult problems
    for nearly any potential use of this water. The water from tests in the
    upper aquifer (Wilkins Peak) is very poor quality, exceeding Class I, II
    and III standards in constituents including TDS, fluoride, chloride,
    ammonia, boron, cadmium, lead, manganese, and nickel. The water from
    the lower aquifer (Tipton) is much better water but exceeds Class I, II
    and III concentrations for fluoride and ammonia.
    It should be noted in conjunction with these data that there were
    considerable differences in the water quality characteristics from one
    well to another, even though some wells were closely grouped. It is
    268
    [5-310]
    

    -------
    Table 9-1. Baseline Water Quality in the Upper Aquifer, Talley Site (from WDEQ Files).
    Well	Well	Well
    0-6	0-5	0-4	Avurace	Hun ye
    Parameter u
    4/11
    4/13
    4/11
    4/13
    4/11
    4/13
    0-4
    0-5
    0-8
    
    
    Hu
    11000
    11000
    23000
    21000
    11800
    1 1500
    11650
    22000
    11000
    11000
    2J0I
    K
    73
    56
    100
    07
    51
    61
    56
    98
    65
    51
    100
    lib'
    <0. 1
    <0. 1
    <0 1
    <0. 1
    7
    50
    2ft
    32
    30
    5U
    22
    20
    67
    T. ilal Anions
    512.37
    505 91
    c-
    n
    •k.
    C;
    !-¦
    96fi 77
    530. or>
    518 02
    53«.50
    1020.27
    509.14
    505.91
    107',
    till)
    24
    24
    4 1
    4 0
    25
    oi
    23
    42
    24
    22
    4 1
    ¦IDS
    20500
    28200
    58700
    52200
    30100
    20100
    20600
    554 50
    28850
    28200
    5H7I
    ll.U'dllO^S
    <0. 1
    <0. 1
    21
    21
    15
    21
    18
    21
    <0. 1
    <0. 1
    21
    To La 1 M hul 1 ii 1 ly
    10100
    10100
    •111000
    ¦12000
    20400
    10700
    20350
    4 54 50
    19250
    19100
    4 800
    
    0.07
    D. HH
    10.01
    10. 00
    0.33
    0.03
    0.03
    10 00
    9.02
    9 . 88
    10. 0
    I'ojtthn: t * vl t y
    I moo
    320OO
    •19000
    4 30110
    3 1000
    32O0(l
    3300O
    46000
    33 000
    32000
    4 901'
    a Concentrations in mg/L except pH {std. units) and conductivity (umhos/cm).
    

    -------
    Table 9-2. Baseline Water Quality in the Lower Aquifer, Talley Site (from VIDEQ Files).
    Parumater**
    Sod i uin
    Polusaltint
    klu^naslum
    Calcium
    Total Catlona
    Clilortito
    F1 war tile
    Nllrata
    S'ul futa
    0.. rbonutu
    DIcarlxinuLo
    I'lioaiiliu Lu
    Tol.il Anions
    AllllllOlt I u
    Tl>3
    tin rtlnuss
    Tn Lu I A1 l(u 1 I n 11 y
    ,>11
    (;<>iii|in: I J"v I ly
    Wei 1
    0-1
    ~TJT\ TJTT
    510
    S50
    0 0
    11.0
    <0. 1
    <0. 1
    6. 1
    6.0
    22.71
    24 40
    1)5
    95
    11
    11
    0.02
    0.01
    44
    27
    140
    ICO
    860
    aao
    <0 01
    0.10
    22.0:1
    2.1. 5fl
    4 . 1
    2.8
    14 20
    1470
    15
    15
    0-10
    000
    0. 02
    0.08
    laoo
    1050
    
    Wei 1
    Wei 1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    0-2
    0
    -3
    
    Average
    
    Rango
    4/11
    4/13
    4/11
    4/13
    6-1
    0-2
    0-3
    
    
    430
    410
    (140
    640
    530
    420
    640
    410
    640
    2.a
    3.8
    25
    21
    10.0
    3.0
    23
    2.3
    25
    0.2
    0.2
    1 . 2
    1.3
    <0. 1
    0.2
    1.2
    <0.1
    1.3
    2.0
    3 3
    6.4
    6. 1
    0.0
    3. 1
    6.2
    2.9
    6.4
    IB. 01
    16.10
    28 0
    2ft .79
    23.60
    18. 45
    26.85
    IB.10
    28 . 0
    81
    81
    270
    270
    95
    81
    270
    81
    270
    11
    11
    7.3
    7.3
    11
    11
    7.3
    7.3
    11
    <0.01
    0.01
    0.04
    0.01
    0.02
    <0.01
    0.02
    <0.01
    0. 04
    1 .8
    <0. 1
    137
    1-19
    35
    0.9
    143
    <0.1
    1 '10
    130
    140
    190
    220
    150
    135
    205
    130
    220
    810
    850
    850
    840
    870
    84S
    845
    840
    HBO
    0. 10
    0.13
    0 09
    <0 01
    0 05
    0. 16
    0.05
    <0.01
    0. 19
    21 .no
    21 ,4fi
    31.11
    32 . 20
    23 .25
    21. 23
    31 .66
    21.00
    32.20
    1 .a
    1.2
    1.7
    1.4
    3.5
    1 . 2
    1.5
    1.2
    4.4
    12:10
    1240
    2000
    1 91)0
    1445
    1235
    1990
    1230
    2000
    8 . 1
    9. 1
    21
    21
    15
    8.6
    21
    8 . 1
    21
    000
    920
    1010
    10GO
    965
    910
    1035
    920
    1 060
    8 .711
    8 .79
    9 02
    8. 93
    9.05
    8.77
    8.97
    8 .76
    9.08
    1700
    1750
    2900
    2800
    1875
    1725
    2850
    1750
    2900
    d Concentrations in nig/l. except pH (std. units) and conductivity (umhos/cni).
    

    -------
    therefore apparent that the ground water quality in and around sites 6,
    9, and 10 is quite variable and more difficult to assess than was
    anticipated by the operators.
    Ground-Mater Use
    No water well permits are registered in the immediate vicinity of
    the DOE Rock Springs oil shale experimental area. A water well permit
    has been issued in the NW i SW i section 11, T18N, R106W for a future
    housing development consisting of a total of 478 proposed units (Wyoming
    State Engineer). The permit is for a well of a depth of 890 feet, far
    below the Green River formation. No other permits have been issued
    within a 1.5 mile radius of section 15. Section 11 is northeast and up
    dip from the experimental sites, and ground-water migration is not
    believed to be in that direction.
    Description of Facilities
    In situ retorting was conducted at only four of the experiment
    sites at the DOE Rock Springs area: sites 4, 7, 9, and 12. At least 8
    Class V injection wells were installed and used at these sites. Figure
    9-2 shows the well pattern for the initial retorting experiment at site
    4, with the No. 5 well as the air injection well (Carpenter, et al.,
    1972). Figure 9-3 shows the injection and production wells at site 9
    where Well No. 1 was the air injection well. Figure 9-4 shows the well
    pattern at site 12. No figure is provided for site 7 because it was a
    short-term (8 day) experiment involving only two or three wells during
    combustion. Each surface facility consisted of air compressors,
    271
    [5-313]
    

    -------
    •1 01
    Figure 9-2. Well Pattern at the Site 4 Retorting Experiment
    (from Carpenter, et al., 1972).
    272
    [5-314]
    

    -------
    ©
    
    ©
    ¦0*
    
    ©
    &
    ©
    ©
    ©
    o PRODUCTION WELL
    INJECTION WEIL
    O OBSERVATION WELL
    gure 9-3. Well Pattern at the Site 9 Retorting Experiment
    (from WDEQ files).
    273
    [5-315]
    

    -------
    1 o
    25 feet
    0E6
    0E2
    OTC
    OTO
    OTJ
    02
    OTB
    OTG OTF
    V® ®W
    0TH OTE
    09
    OTD
    0E4
    OTP
    OTI
    OE5
    OTN
    OTA
    04
    OTL OTK
    OTM
    OTS
    08
    06
    OTR
    OTT
    OTU
    ® 5
    North
    07
    ® Production Wells
    0 Injection Wells
    T Designates Instrument Well
    Figure 9-4. Well Pattern at the Site 12 Retorting Experiment
    (from Long, et al ., 1930).
    274
    [5-316]
    

    -------
    buildings containing control equipment, holding tanks, demisters,
    piping, wellhead, and repair and support equipment shops. During 1980
    and 1981 all facilities were removed with the exception of the water
    monitoring wells.
    Since the wells in each retorting pattern were involved with
    high temperature operations, the wells were completed by using
    high-temperature cement with 50% silica flour to cement the annul us from
    bottom to top. All production/injection wells used 7 to 8.6 inch steel
    casing and were cased to the top of the target production zone which was
    left as open hole. Observation wells constructed by DOE and Talley
    Energy used 4- to 6-inch steel casing. Details of construction for the
    USGS water monitor wells are not yet available.
    Operational History
    f^g^0E^Qnduated^peCT.tij3its^at^»^8QckgSprj ngsissii te-oy erj-ia.-.pe rriod ^
    Although the DOE conducted 11 of 13
    planned experiments associated with various phases of in situ research,
    only 3, (sites 4, 9, and 12) were successful in attaining subsurface
    retorting and are summarized here. Six other experiments ( 1, 2, 3, 5,
    6, and 7) involving the use of injection wells for hydraulic and/or
    explosive fracturing were conducted between 1969 ana 1977.
    ,s tenrnrngysiaaai n s'4^neft:t^ff&3:lsr. 4) 9pcQpane55i^^^Tff43P®T^oml^S'tibit':?fQr
    ^gaiangr^BS^rJ^haj^j^a nd 5)	sus ta in
    275
    [5-317]
    

    -------
    During the experiments,
    about 190 quarts of liquid explosive and from 350 to 7500 pounds of
    pelletized TNT, each at different sites, were pumped into wells designed
    for fracturing of oil shale and wells designed for fracturing and
    retorting oil shale.
    Hydraulic fracturing both with and without sand for propping
    fractures was conducted in the upper Tipton zones. Explosives were
    injected and detonated to increase fracture frequency at Site 4. The
    combustion phase of the test was initiated April 23 and was terminated
    on June 3, 1969, a period of 41 days. Approximately 30,200 gallons of
    oil was produced at Site 4,of which 8,000 gallons was recovered above
    ground (Carpenter, et al., 1972). The remainder was left in place
    underground.
    The experiment at site 9 was a larger version of the Site 4 tests
    and was conducted at a greater depth. Subsurface fractures were created
    by both hydro/sand fracing and explosive fracturing. The experiment was
    run for a period in excess of 150 days in 1976, recovering 2,483 gallons
    of oil or about 1 percent of the oil shale reserves in the 40-foot
    Tipton zone (Long, et al., 1977) at Site 9.
    At Site 12, a series of experiments were conducted between 1977 and
    1979 in a 21 foot zone of the upper Tipton member that was hydraulically
    and explosively fractured. After 3 retorting attempts, combustion was
    achieved but could not be sustained beyond 10 days. No oil was
    recovered at the surface.
    The most recent ground-water investigation, conducted by the USGS
    from 1981 to 1983, included water-quality analyses from 25 postburn
    observation wells downgradient from most of the experiment sites. Table
    276
    [5-318]
    

    -------
    9-3 and Figure 9-5 provide locations and completion data for the 25
    wells. Table 9-4 presents the ranges of common constituents and trace
    elements.
    Some postburn water quality sampling was initially conducted prior
    to 1977. The available data for the DOE experimental oil-sale sites 6,
    9, and 10 near Rock Springs were analyzed by Smith and Weand (1977).
    Most observation wells sampled at these three research sites showed very
    high TDS levels, with sodium usually representing over 98 percent of the
    cations. In most instances sulfate proved to be the most abundant
    anion, although carbonate and chloride levels were generally high also.
    No evidence indicates migration of the constituents into surface waters.
    In studying contaminant transport in the DOE experiment area, the
    USGS selected thiocyanate as a non-hazardous indicator to detect
    migration away from the experiment sites. Thiocyanate was located as a
    plume migrating south and southwest to a distance of about 1/2 mile from
    site 9. It was predicted to discharge at the surface in late 1985 or
    early 1986 at a peak concentration of 45 mg/L. (Glover, 1986).
    Observations of quality of water from USGS records indicate that
    hazardous wastes from oil shale retorting experiments are generally
    located in wells at or very near the individual sites and that transport
    of such constituents has been at a relatively slow rate. However, the
    quality analyses from the USGS and DOE monitoring wells vary greatly,
    affirming that transport may be occurring to the west or southwest.
    The Tipton shale aquifer has suffered adverse impacts as a result
    of the Rock Springs in situ oil shale gasification experiment in that
    the ground water in the aquifer has become contaminated by a variety of
    277
    [5-319]
    

    -------
    Table 9-3. Monitoring Well Completion Information, DOE Rock
    Springs Site (from WDEQ Files).
    Well H	Owner	OeDth	Completed Formation
    9T-1
    USGS
    191
    T i p ton
    9T-2
    uses
    75
    Ti pton
    9T-3
    USGS
    !i»7
    Ti pton
    9T-A
    USGS
    202
    Ti pton
    9T-5
    USGS
    202
    T i p ton
    ST-6
    USGS
    202
    Ti pton
    9T-7
    USGS
    350
    Vasa tch
    9T-8
    USGS
    1»50
    Wasatch
    9T-9
    USGS
    1020
    Wasa tch
    3T-10
    USGS
    200
    Ti pton
    9T-11
    USGS
    200
    Ti pton
    9T-I2
    USGS
    180
    Ti pton
    9T-1 3
    USGS
    200
    T i p ton
    9 T-U
    USGS
    350
    Uasa tch
    9T" 15
    USGS
    160
    Ti p ton
    6-203
    OOE
    152
    Ti pton
    9-11-01
    OOE
    227
    T i p ton
    9-B
    OOE
    206
    Ti pton
    3-H
    OOE
    170
    Ti pton
    9-1
    OOE
    169
    Tipton
    9-0
    DOE
    900
    Wasatch
    9-E
    OOE
    17*»
    Ti pton
    9-5
    OOE
    239
    Tipton
    12-U
    DOE
    3^2
    Tipton
    12-^8
    OOE
    90
    WiIk*ns Peak
    278
    [5-320]
    

    -------
    on
    I
    o
    ro
    4A^B
    S te 12
    11-01
    ¦3
    ;
    
    ¦ 9T13
    9T1
    -------
    Table 9-4. Summary of Baseline Water Quality and Postburn Water Quality at the DOE Rock Springs Oil Shale
    In Situ Gasification Site (from WDEQ Files).
    Parameter
    Upper Aqui fer
    Lower Aquifer
    Postburn Range
    Conductivity (umhos)
    32,000 - 49,000
    1,750 - 2,900
    1,610 - 5,400
    pH (units)
    9.88 - 10.01
    8.76 - 9.08
    7.8 - 12.0
    TDS
    28,200 - 58,700
    1,230 - 2,000
    875 - 50,600
    Fluoride
    46 - 95
    7.3 - 11
    0.3 - 130
    Calcium
    <0.1 - 8.3
    2.9 - 6.4
    0.2 - 29
    Magnesium
    <0.1
    <0.1 - 1.3
    <1 - 160
    Sodium
    11,000 - 23,000
    410 - 640
    360 - 18,000
    Sulfate
    110 - 1,730
    <0.1 - 149
    1.5 - 2,700
    Chloride
    3,600 - 3,900
    81 - 270
    38 - 7,900
    Nitrate
    <0.01 - 0.02
    <0.01 - 0.04
    
    Ammonia
    22 - 44
    1.2 - 4.4
    0.1 - 180
    Arsenic
    0.01 - 0.11
    <0.01 - 0.04
    <0.001 - 0.25
    Barium
    0.3 - 0.5
    0.1 - 0.4
    <0.1 - 0.43
    Boron
    8 - 11
    0.9 - 1.4
    0.9 - 840
    Cadmium
    0.06 - 0.11
    <0.01
    <0.001 - 0.005
    Copper
    0.2 - 0.5
    0.3 - 1.4
    0.002 - 0.055
    Chromium
    0.05 - 0.08
    0.03 - 0.05
    <0.001 - 0.015
    Iron
    0.6 - 3.5
    4.8 - 12
    
    Lead
    0.4 - 8.1
    0.7 - 1.3
    
    Manganese
    <<0.09 - 0.13
    <<0.11 - 0.25
    
    Mercury
    0.001
    <0.001
    
    Nickel
    0.3 - 0.7
    <0.01 - 0.05
    
    Si 1ver
    0.03 - 0.06
    0.01
    
    Zinc
    0.2 - 0.9
    0.8 - 4.9
    
    

    -------
    organic pyrolysis product chemicals. These chemicals include phenolic
    and polynuclear aromatic (PNA) compounds. Such chemicals generally
    render water non-potable when present in milligram per liter quantities,
    due to the tastes and odors they impart to the water. In addition,
    several of the PNAs are known or suspected carcinogens.
    At the present time, this contamination is not known to be having
    any effect upon the public health or welfare. There are no direct users
    of water from the Tipton aquifer in the immediate area, as the water is
    naturally of very poor quality. The USGS is continuing to study the
    movement of contaminant plumes away from the gasification area.
    Prediction of Future Ground-Water Impacts
    The Rock Springs site operator has made no effort to restore
    ground-water quality at the Rock Springs in situ oil shale gasification
    site. There are no known plans to conduct any future additional
    experiments or ground-water monitoring or restoration activities, other
    than the USGS investigation, at the Rock Springs site. Potential future
    adverse environmental impacts resulting from the experiment will depend
    upon the extent to which contaminants migrate to areas where they may
    discharge to surface streams, most likely Bitter Creek. No
    contamination of Bitter Creek has been detected, but monitoring of the
    creek has not been regularly, or recently, performed.
    The USGS thiocyanate contaminant plume study, when published, may
    reveal the extent of the threat of surface discharge of contaminants
    generated by the gasification experiment. Such studies, however, are
    281
    [5-323]
    

    -------
    probably the only way to assess the threat posed to ground waters and to
    the public health and welfare by the contaminants generated in the
    Tipton shale aquifer by the experiment. Adequate modeling of the
    aquifer is not possible without far more data on the flow regime in the
    aquifer. The hydraulic characteristics of the aquifer appear to be very
    strongly dependent upon local fractures, and the aquifer as a whole
    shows characteristics too heterogeneous to be modeled using the limited
    data available.
    Lacking any better method of predicting future impacts of the
    experiment, a worst case approach must be utilized. The assumptions
    assumed for this case are as follows:
    1.	Contaminated ground water in the Tipton Shale aquifer at the
    DOE Rock Springs in situ oil shale gasification experimental
    site will eventually discharge to Bitter Creek, via the
    alluvium beneath that stream.
    2.	The Tipton Shale will afford no natural attenuation in the
    concentration of the contaminants in the aquifer.
    .•Wbbt2Q3jaa^gag7p3 n w rewhi
    . It is assumed that the rate of
    contaminant movement, and ultimate discharge from the aquifer,
    is 150 feet per year.
    282
    [5-324]
    

    -------
    4.	The wetted front of the contaminant plume is assumed to be 100
    feet wide (the distance between wells 9-6 and 9-8); and 21
    feet thick (the thickness of the experimental burn zone).
    This is an area of 2,100 square feet.
    5.	The fracture porosity of the Tipton Shale is 0.10. This
    figure is speculative, and has therefore been chosen to give a
    worst case result.
    6.	The concentration of methyl naphthalene in the contaminated
    aquifer water when it reaches Bitter Creek will be 3,000 ug/L.
    Using these assumptions, a discharge of 0.001 cfs of contaminated
    water from the Tipton aquifer can be calculated. A value of 5 cfs has
    been assumed as the reasonable minimum flow in Bitter Creek at this
    location. This results in the conclusion that Bitter Creek, during
    periods of low flow, will be contaminated with 1.7 ug/L of
    methyl pyridine resulting from the in situ oil gasification experiments.
    This does not pose an immediate threat to public health (particularly
    considering the poor quality of Bitter Creek water), but it would be a
    measurable adverse impact on the environment.
    Recommendations for Mitigation of Existing Ground-Water Pollution
    It is not certain that any measures can be taken to alleviate long
    term pollution of the ground waters affected by the Rock Springs oil
    shale in situ gasification experiments. Pound"wton««iia
    dijU FPBi (y^'PTflWV	^!¦ u»ei' 'P-wctui »
    hos&HEfieefe, but the contaminants are probably spread throughout the
    affected portion of the formation. As a result, contaminants will
    283
    [5-325]
    

    -------
    probably be released very slowly from the blocks of formation rock lying
    between the fractures. It does not appear that there is any practical
    way to remove all the contaminants from these blocks.
    One alternative to prevent migration of the contaminants out of the
    experimental area would be the construction of barriers such as slurry
    cut-off walls or grout curtains to prevent the movement of
    uncontaminated ground water into this area. The practicality of this
    measure is open to question due to the difficulty of guaranteeing the
    performance of such a barrier over a long period of time.
    Additional efforts to define the actual extent of contamination
    might be useful. Such activities could help determine if there is any
    risk to surrounding property owners or the public from surfacing
    pollutants.
    Prevention of Ground-Water Pollution at Similar Sites
    As stated in the case study for the Hanna in situ coal gasification
    experiment, ground-water restoration should be included as a requirement
    of all permits for projects for in situ mineral recovery projects,
    regardless of size or ownership. Such a requirement should be imposed
    regardless of any anticipated lack of ground water impact. In those
    situations where totally new mining and/or restoration technology is to
    be employed, WDEQ would be justified in limiting the size of proposed
    projects until restoration has been satisfactorily demonstrated.
    In addition, permit applications should contain sufficiently
    thorough information to be able to determine not only the presence or
    284
    [5-326]
    

    -------
    absence of ground water in a proposed in situ mining zone, but also the
    quantity and quality of such water.
    Summary
    Explosives and ignition agents, frac sand and air were injected
    into at least 8 Class V injection wells at the Rock Springs oil shale in
    situ retorting experiments conducted between 1969 and 1979. Injection
    was into oil shales in the Tipton Member of the Green River Formation,
    in an area that contains few, if any, productive aquifers. No baseline
    hydrologic information was collected prior to the experiments, and only
    sporadic monitoring was performed until the USGS conducted a 3-year
    study between 1981 and 1983.
    The monitoring showed that at least two aquifers exist above the
    retorted zones. The upper aquifer contains very poor quality water
    having dissolved solids in the range of 28,000 to 59,000 mg/L. The
    lower aquifer contains water that contains 1,200 to 2,000 mg/L dissolved
    solids and generally meets Wyoming Class III water-quality standards.
    Neither aquifer has significant permeability, and neither is known to
    yield water to any permitted wells in the vicinity of the experiment
    site.
    Retorting produces a variety of ground-water contaminants which
    include organic and inorganic pyrolysis products and leachate. The USGS
    investigation has shown that in the 7 years that elapsed between in situ
    retorting and the initiation of their monitoring, a contaminant plume
    has migrated little more than one-half mile from the retort sites. The
    aquifer in the intervening area has been contaminated, but was not
    285
    [5-327]
    

    -------
    classified as a sensitive aquifer even prior to the experiments. The
    most significant threat appears to be contamination of surface waters
    and alluvial aquifers by discharge of contaminated ground water.
    Review of other oil shale areas in Wyoming indicates that there are
    geologic and hydrologic settings similar to the Rock Springs site. Very
    little shallow ground water is present, and most of that is of very poor
    quality. Consequently, the impacts of in-situ retorting, particularly
    at the experimental scale to which Class V injection wells are limited,
    are not likely to be significant. Future experiments, however, should
    be required to include hydrologic investigations adequate to determine
    in detail the occurrence, quality, and movement of ground water prior
    to, during, and after the experiment is conducted.
    286
    [5-328]
    

    -------
    SECTION 5.3.4
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (OR SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    AUTHOR:
    (OR INVESTIGATOR)
    DATE:
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION:
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    Rio Blanco Oil Shale Company
    MIS Retort
    Rio Blanco Oil Shale Company
    September 30, 1983
    Rio Blanco Oil Shale Company
    Federal Prototype Oil Shale
    Lease Tract C-a
    Colorado, USEPA Region VIII
    Oil Shale Retorting
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES: The company proposes to abandon the two
    modified in situ (MIS) retorts tracts in the following manner:
    1.	Pump existing water out of retorts
    2.	Allow retorts to flocd completely
    3.	Recirculate water through retort to leach most of soluble
    material from the rubble
    4.	Pump all leachate from the retorts and product collection
    system
    5.	Flood retorts
    6. Monitor groundwater in area around retorts until it has been
    determined than an unacceptable migration of harmful
    substances is not likely to be detected in the monitoring
    wells adjacent to the retorts.
    [5-329]
    

    -------
    RIO BLANCO OIL SHALE COMPANY
    MIS RETORT ABANDONMENT PROGRAM
    SEPTEMBER 30, 1983
    

    -------
    RETORT ABANDONMENT PROGRAM
    TA8LE OF CONTENTS
    Page
    Section	Title	 Number
    1.0	Introduction 		1
    1.1	Abstract 		1
    1.2	Executive Summary		1
    2.0	Background Information 		3
    2.1	Present Conditions 		3
    2.1.1	Retorts		3
    2.1.2	Ponds		3
    2.1.3	Groundwater 		5
    2.2	Retort Abandoment Related Research		5
    2.2.1	Leachability of Retorted Rubble 		5
    2.2.2	Leachate Water Quality 		9
    2.2.3	Rubble Characteristics 		11
    2.3	Retort Abandoment Alternatives 		12
    2.3.1	Description of Abandoment Alternatives 		12
    2.3.2	Selection Rationale 		15
    3.0	Retort Abandonment Plan 		17
    3.1	Initial Retort Pumpdown Phase 		17
    3.1.1	Pump:ng 		17
    3.1.2	Pond Management 		18
    3.1.3	Monitoring 		18
    3.2	Retort Flood/Cool Phase 		19
    3.2.1	Pumping 		19
    3.2.2	Pond Management 		19
    3.2.3	Monitoring 		20
    [5-331]
    

    -------
    TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued
    Page
    Section	Title	Number
    3.3	Circulate/Leach Phase 		20
    3.3.1	Pumping 		21
    3.3.2	Pond Management 		21
    3.3.3	Monitoring 		21
    3.4	Total Retort Pumpdown Phase 		22
    3.4.1	Pumping 		23
    3»4.2	Pond Management 		23
    3.4.3	Monitoring 		23
    3.5	Final Retort Flooding Phase 		24
    3.5.1	Flooding 				24
    3.5.2	Pond Management 		25
    3.5.3	Monitoring 		25
    3.6	Extended Monitoring 			26
    3.6.1	Extended Monitoring - Phase II 		26
    3.6.2	Phase III 		27
    3.6.3	Impact Response 		28
    3.7	Phase IV 				29
    4.0	Retort Stability 		30
    5.0	Monitoring Plan for Abandoment 		31
    5.1	Impacts of MIS Abandonment 		31
    5.1.1	General Observations 		31
    5.1.2	Tract C-a MIS Retort leachate Impacts 		35
    5.2	Support Information/Rationale for Monitoring Design ..	39
    5.2.1	General Strategy 		39
    5.2.2	Monitoring Locations 		40
    5.2.3	Constituents for Monitoring 		41
    [5-332]
    

    -------
    TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued
    Page
    Section		Title	 Number
    5.3	Monitoring Strategy 		46
    5.3.1	Monitor Well Locations 		46
    5.3.2	Well Completions 		46
    5.3.3	Monitoring Parameters 		47
    5.3.4	Monitoring Schedule 		47
    5.4	Monitoring Data Evaluation 		54
    5.5	Leachate Water Quality Data 		58
    5.6	References 		71
    [5-333]
    

    -------
    LIST OF TABLES
    Table	Page
    Number		Title	 Number
    1	Evaporation Pond Specific Conductance 		4
    2	Mine and Retort Water Levels 		7
    3	Retort Rubble Temperture 		8
    4	Comparative Water Quality - Retorts 		10
    5	Comparison of Yellow Creek, Upper Aquifer and
    Retort Water Quality 		37
    6	Constituents for Water Quality Monitoring 		44
    7	Data Screens (Colorado Basic Standards Regulations)...	56
    8	Data Screens (Colorado Basic Standards Regulations)...	57
    9	Evaluation Criteria for Trace Organics 		59
    10	Retort Leachate Water Quality Analysis -
    Proposed BUQ Constituents 	'		60
    11	Additional Analyses of Retort Water Leachate 		62
    12	GC/MS Organic Analyses of Water Sampled Form
    Backflooded Rio Blanco Retort 1 		64
    13	Priority Pollutant Analysis 		68
    [5-334]
    

    -------
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    12
    13
    14
    15
    72
    73
    74
    75
    76
    77
    78
    79
    80
    81
    82
    83
    84
    *5
    86
    LIST OF FIGURES
    	Title	
    Tract C-a Surface Facilities 	
    Evaporation Pond Volume 	
    East Pond Water Volume 	
    Water Level in Well MDP-2C 	
    Water Production from Mine 	
    Water Levels in Mine Shaft 	
    Water Flow into Retorts 	
    Water Level in Retorts 	
    Retort Water Specific Conductance 	
    Retort Water Temperature and pH 	
    Retort Leachate Chemistry - Sodium and Potassium 	
    Retort Leachate Chemistry - Ammonia and 00C 	
    Retort Leachate Chemistry - Sulfate and Alkalinity ...
    Retort Leachate Chemistry - Fluoride and Boron 	
    Mine and Retort Plan 	
    

    -------
    RETORT ABANDONMENT PROGRAM
    1.0 Introduction
    The Rio Blanco Oil Shale Company (RBOSC) has developed a plan for the
    abandonment of the modified in situ retorts on Federal Prototype Oil Shale
    Lease Tract C-a. This proposal is submitted to the Bureau of Land Manage-
    ment, Branch of Oil Shale in accordance with the conditions of approval for
    the Revised Detailed Development Plan dated September 22, 1977.
    1.1	Abstract
    RBOSC proposes to abandon the two modified in situ retorts on Tract
    C-a in the following manner:
    o Pump existing water out of retorts
    o Allow retorts to flood completely
    o Recirculate water through retort to leach most of soluble
    material from the rubble
    o Pump all leachate from the retorts and product collection system
    o Flood retorts
    o Monitor groundwater in area around retorts until it has been
    determined that an unacceptable migration of harmful substances
    is not likely to be detected in the monitoring wells adjacent to
    the retorts
    The criteria for cessation of monitoring are spelled out in the
    proposal.
    1.2	Executive Summary
    A plan for the abandonment of the modified in situ retorts on Tract
    C-a has been developed in accordance with the stipulations attached to the
    approval of the Revised Detailed Development Plan dated September 22, 1977.
    [5-336]
    

    -------
    Several retort abandonment scenarios were evaluated before selecting the
    proposed plan.
    o Flood retorts and monitor
    o Leach by circulation followed by flood retorts and monitor
    o Flood retorts, leach by circulation, pumpdown, flood, and monitor
    o Pumpdown, flood, leach by circulation, pumpdown, flood, and
    monitor
    o Continuous retort pumping
    o Grout retort rubble
    o Curtain grouting around retorts
    Based on experience since the end of retort operation, laboratory
    research, and hydrologic modeling the Pump - Flood - Leach - Pump - Flood -
    Monitor option was selected for Tract C-a MIS retort abandonment. The
    grouting options are potential fallback solutions should the proposed
    monitoring program demonstrate the need for such action.
    An extensive groundwater monitoring program is planned. Daily,
    weekly, and monthly sampling and analysis activities are an integral part
    of the monitoring program. Specific inorganic and organic substances have
    been selected as indicators of leachate migration from the r?torts. Re-
    sponse and termination criteria are also presented.
    [5-337]
    

    -------
    SECTION 5.3.5
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (OR SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    MIS Retort Abandonment Program -
    June 1986 Pumpdown Operation
    AUTHOR:
    (OR INVESTIGATOR)
    Rio Blanco Oil Shale Company, Inc.
    DATE:
    September 1986
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION: Rio Blanco Oil Shale Company
    Federal Prototype Lease Tract C-a
    Colorado, USEPA Region VIII
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES: In 1980 and 1981, Rio Blanco conducted two
    experiments using MIS retorting technology. This report
    summarizes the operations and results of the second pumpout phase
    of MIS retort abandonment, conducted in June 1986.
    Retort water was discharged to evaporation ponds or storage tanks
    for subsequent transfer to evaporation ponds. Nearly 15 million
    gallons of fluid was pumped. No discharge to surface streams
    occurred. An extensive monitoring program was conducted for che
    pumpout operation to track operations and evaluate program
    ef fec tiveness.
    Maximum drawdown in the retort system was about 65 feet.
    Monitoring well data indicated that the pumpout operation
    resulted in significant improvement of water quality within the
    retorts. Specific conductance declined from 2600 to 1900
    micromhos after pumpout. TDS levels declined, and pH values
    decreased from greater than 9 to 8.5. Dissolved organic carbon
    concentrations were also reduced. Water quality in near-retort
    monitor wells showed minimal effect from the pumping operation.
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    Modified In Situ (MIS) Retorting
    Technology
    [5-338]
    

    -------
    MIS RETORT ABANDONMENT PROGRAM
    JUNE 1986 PUMPDOWN OPERATION
    REPORT TO:
    BLM/Oil Shale Projects Office
    RIO 8LANCO OIL SHALE COMPANY, INC.
    SEPTEMBER 1986
    [5-339]
    

    -------
    TABLE OF CONTENTS
    SECTION		TITLE		PAGE
    1	Summary 		1
    Z	Abandonment Operations 		4
    3	Physical Setting 		10
    4	Hydrological Analysis 		16
    5	Water Quality Analysis 		20
    [5-340]
    

    -------
    1. SUMMARY
    In 1980 and 1981, Rio Blanco Oil Shale Company conducted two experiments
    using a modified in situ (MIS) retorting technology. These experiments
    were conducted on Federal Prototype lease Tract C-a. This report summa-
    rizes the operations and results of the second pumpout phase of MIS retort
    abandonment, conducted in June, 1986. The first pumpout operation was
    completed in June, 1985 and was summarized in a report to BLM in September,
    1985.
    The initial MIS retort abandonment operations included complete flooding of
    the retort system for a period of approximately one year (May 1984 througn
    mid-May 1985). The main objective of the program was to remove soluble
    materials from the retort system. In May 1985, the retort system was
    pumped to remove these saline waters to lined evaporation ponds. During
    the 1985 operation, the mine water system was pumped concurrently to
    protect the bulkheads which separate the mine and retort systems and to
    minimize the inflow of fresh ground water into the lower part of the retort
    system. From observations of ground water inflow and water levels during
    the 1985 pumpout, Rio Blanco concluded that the retort system could be
    pumped alone without incurring these problems.
    Following the 1985 operation, the water levels in the vicinity of the MIS
    retorts returned to pre-pumping levels and remained as such until the June
    1986 operation. During the 1986 pumpout, only the retort system was
    pumped, although capacity to pump the mine system was maintained for use if
    needed. All water pumped from the retort system was again discharged to
    lined evaporation ponds.
    This report summarizes the 1986 pumpdown operation and evaluates the
    effectiveness of the operation for retort cleanup and abandonment.
    Previous data and reports to the U.S. Bureau of Land Management/Oil Shale
    Projects Office (8LM/0SP0) have evaluated pre-pumpdown conditions.
    Detailed monitoring data listings have also been submitted to the BLM/OSPO
    and are not included in this report.
    -1-
    [5-341]
    

    -------
    Retort water was discharged to evaporation ponds or to temporary storage in
    tanks for subsequent transfer to the evaporation ponds. Nearly 15 million
    gallons were pumped from the retort system. Mo retort water was discharged
    to surface streams. Pumping of the mine water system to control water
    levels was not required.
    An extensive monitoring program was conducted for the pumpout operation in
    order to track operations (e.g. water levels and flows) and to evaluate the
    effectiveness of the flooding/pumpout operation (e.g. water quality).
    The retort system was pumped at a rate of about 420 gallons per minute for
    the first three days, starting on June 2, 1986. The pumping rate was then
    increased to about 1050 gallons per minute for the duration of the
    operation, which terminated on June 13. The water pumped from the retort
    system represents about 2 pore volumes and about 3 pore volumes for the MIS
    retorts alone. The retort system was pumped until the tanks were full and
    the evaporation pond system was filled to 90 percent of total capacity.
    Since the start of the abandonment program, approximately eight pore
    volumes have been pumped through the retorts and about 190 tons of
    dissolved salts have been pumped from the retorts into the evaporation
    ponds. An additional 245 tons of dissolved salts were pumped from the
    retort system prior to the 1985 pumping program.
    Upper Aquifer well D-5 was also pumped (about 1.2 million gallons) during
    the pumpout operation to refill the west pond which is the domestic water
    source for the tract.
    Because of the reduced pumping relative to the 1985 operation, the drawdown
    of the upper aquifer and the cone of depression were more limited. The
    maximum drawdown in the retort system was about 65 feet. As expected, the
    cone of depression was somewhat elliptical in shape and oriented to the
    northwest - southeast direction. The cone of depression did not extend
    significantly beyond the tract boundary.
    As measured in the RAM-7 monitor wells, located within Retort 1, and in the
    discharges of retort pumps, the 1986 pumpout operation resulted in
    -2-
    [5-342]
    

    -------
    significant improvement in the water quality within the retorts. In the
    RAM-7 wells (excluding RAM-7A which was plugged), the specific conductance
    declined from about 2600 micromhos per cm before the pumpout to about
    1900-2000 after the pumpout. The TDS in RAM-7 was less than 1500 mg/1 in
    post-pumpout samples. The pH also decreased to about 8.5 from 9 or more.
    The increasing trend in salinity observed in the retort system for a short
    period after the 1985 pumping operation has not yet been observed following
    the 1986 operation. Dissolved organic carbon concentrations were also
    reduced by the 1986 pumpout.
    Water quality in near-retort monitor wells showed minimal effect from the
    pumping operation.
    The 1986 pumpout operation was successful in simplifying the operations by
    pumping only the retort system. This resulted in greater ease of operation
    and no surface discharges or reinjection of mine water. Also significant
    progress was made in improving the water quality within the retort system.
    -3-
    [5-343]
    

    -------
    SECTION 5.3.6
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (OR SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    Groundwater Pollutants from
    from Underground Coal
    Gasification (UCG)
    AUTHOR:
    (OR INVESTIGATOR)
    M. J. Humenick and C. F. Mattox
    DATE:
    December 18, 1977
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION: Not Applicable
    NATURE OF BUSINESS
    Not Applicable
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES: This impact of UCB on local groundwater
    quality is addressed in this research. Soviet studies on large
    UCG projects indicate that groundwater contamination from these
    operations persists up to five years after the projects are
    terminated. Concentrations of organics, ammonia, sulfate, and
    TDS were found to exceed drinking water standards during a field
    study of Texas utilities. Apparently most inorganic contaminants
    are extracted by groundwater intrusion from the ash in the burn
    zone. The impact of groundwater quality as a function of time
    and distance from the burn is site specific. The rate of water
    transport is a function of local hydraulic gradients, strata
    permeability, and structure discontinuities. Conclusions of this
    study are:
    1.	The impact of UCG on groundwater is a function of the local
    subsurface environment, and can be minimized by careful site
    selection.
    2.	Major pollutants include polynuclear and phenolic organic
    compounds, ammonia, sulfate, calcium and hydroxide. The
    source of inorganic pollutants is primarily ash leachate,
    and the source of organics and ammonia is primarily
    condensed vapors.
    3.	Pulverized lignite appears to have a higher capacity for
    sorption of pollutants than either of the two clay seams.
    4.	Adsorption of organics by clay and lignite is an effective
    removal mechanism, however, some TOC may be nonadsorbable.
    5.	The transport of inorganic cations is strongly affected by
    ion exchange.
    6.	Anions exhibited less interaction with clay and lignite.
    [5-344]
    

    -------
    GROUNDWATER POLLUTANTS FROM UNDERGROUND
    COAL GASIFICATION
    Michael J Humevick and C Fletcher Mattox
    The Lnnersm of Texas at Austin Department of CjmI Cnwnixnng.
    Austin TX 78712 L' S A
    iRt'tritrd IS Dfiimrtfr 1977)
    Xbstuct— The purpose of this siud\ *a« in du<.rmme ihe comaminants released 10 groundwaters
    as .1 result of the underground c-i'i'ic iu>'p <>i Imnn. in*1 il.t.rmn. innn .n .
    . ¦ -n. "ii 11 l tn. r inp.M ( k i . 'i' i i . muruiii n i ^— t.vm i»n it.a\.naie and ».on-
    JliticU sapors in surrounding sirata Ash %js found lo weld sulfate tjlcium and hydroxide while
    condensed vapors contributed nreanics and ammonia as maior chanues to *aier qualits The orgamcs
    consisied of mostK polvnuclear aromatic h\dn*.arbons Phenols *eri nol major organic components.
    Lignite and clav strata weic studied to determine their abilm to sorb the groundwater contaminants.
    Both types of strata were effective in sorhine oreanics and ammonia The behavior could be described
    by Freundlich isotherms. Divalent cations uere released hv ion etchange with monovalent cations.
    Anions had little affirm\ for the strata Relaunch little migration of ammonia and most of the orgamcs
    was predicted as compared *nh calaum sulfaic and Mime nun-sorhahle jraanics
    INTRODUCTION
    The impact of underground co.il gasification (LCG)
    cm the local environment is potentially damaging Of
    the possible impacts the effect of UCG on local
    groundwater qualnv is addressed in "hi;, research
    tx-eause il is the least understood and. perhaps, the
    most significant concern in the process' implemen-
    tation Documentation exists in the literature and
    from current projects that pollutants are released to
    groundwaters when normal flow returns to a post
    jasification zone
    Soviet studies (Kononov. 19641 on large-scale UCG
    projects have revealed that groundwater contami-
    nation resulting from gasification persisted up to five
    iears after production had ceased There were other
    reports (Klimentov 1963) stating that phenols were
    found wuhm another aquifer in Russia which
    extended over an area of 10 km*
    During a small field study of Texas utilities in 1976
    it was found that after gasification and intrusion of
    groundwater back into the burn cavity, water samples
    taken from the cavity contained an array of pollutants
    which are summarized in Table I Of concern were
    the high concentrations of oreanics. ammonia, sulfate,
    jnd total dissolved solids (Edgar ei al. 1977\ -Ml of
    these parameters exceed concentrations acceptable for
    dnnlung water supplies. While the increase in overall
    mineralization was approximated tenfold, excessive
    release of trace metals did not occur Laboratory
    studies by several investigators on representative
    media similar to that remaining underground after
    gasification have indicated the source of these pollu-
    Unts (Cjmpbel) & Washington, 1976. Humemck.
    1976. Henry, 1976). Apparently most of the inorganic
    contaminants are extracted by groundwater intrusion
    from the ash m the bum zone after gasification
    Orgamcs and ammonia are deposited in the sur-
    rounding strata bv condensation from cooling eases
    during gasification
    After determining the npe and amount of pollu-
    tants released to groundwater by LCG it is then
    necessary to determine their fate The pollutants vmII
    exhibit chromatographic transport away from the
    burn cavity in the direction of ground water flow
    Table I Water quality changes after gasification
    Parameter
    Before, nig r1
    After mg r 1
    CaJ *
    :o
    :oo
    Me-"
    5
    15
    Na"
    100
    300
    hco;
    300
    500
    co,
    ¦>
    0
    so;
    4
    1150
    H-.S
    002
    04
    CT
    30
    40
    F"
    01
    07
    NOj
    —
    :o
    NH,
    10
    100
    TDS
    350
    :300
    Phenols
    01
    :o
    TOC
    20
    200
    Volatile dissolved solids
    —
    300
    CN"
    —
    <001
    CNS"
    —
    <05
    ch4
    042
    016
    pH
    —
    76
    As
    —
    <001
    Ba
    —
    < 1
    Cd
    —
    <001
    Cm
    —
    <01
    Cr (total)
    —
    <005
    Mn
    —
    007
    Ha
    —
    ooo:
    Se
    —
    <001
    Ag
    —
    <005
    Zn
    —
    <01
    B
    —
    0.3
    J63
    [5-345]
    

    -------
    06J
    Tvpe [ Water
    Tvpe II Water
    Type III Water
    Miuuhi ) Hi minii k anil C Flftihik Matuix
    Table ^ Water uied in sorption studies
    Preparation
    NH,-S
    UK)",, Burn cavitv water
    '. Hum eji m uater
    12", Condensate
    :5D mgl"' NH.CI
    S5D^ Burn cavnv water
    I5°i Condensate
    50m g I"
    'HUmi! I '
    I "Omg I"1
    TOC
    47mg I''
    |74m« I" 1
    :s7mgr
    The imp.ut on urmindw.iter uualttv as a function of
    irm<- and Jisiarie_ ,'r.>m the 'iur,i s m,l >pr.l in. Flu
    rale ol water transport is a function ol" local Indraulic
    gradients, strata permeability, and structural discon-
    tinuities The chromatographic nature of migration
    is determined by [he adsorption-desorption. precipi-
    tation-dissolution and ion exchange reactions with
    the strata In addition other mechanisms such as ni-
    tration cheinic.il reactions and anaerobic biochemi-
    cal activity will influence pollutant transport A sig-
    nificant body of literature from related nelds is
    alreadv available that is concerned with the transport
    01 inorganic materials such js ammonia sullatc most
    other common anions and canons along with hejw
    metals (Grove JL Wood I*>77. Wood 1977 Ptndcr
    1973. Lai &. Jurinak 19711. However little intorma-
    uon is available on the sorption etfects towards the
    type of organtcs that will be released.
    This paper investigates the physical and chemical
    phenomena which will affect the transport of UCC
    pollutants in the underground environment
    METHODS AND MATERIALS
    To evaluate the behavior of organics and ammonia in
    the surrounding strata, actual groundwater samples from
    a bCG site were used in the studv Gross organic concen-
    trations were determined bv total organic carbon (TOO
    analysis, while specific organics were idemiried bv gas
    chromatographv-mass spectrometry iGC-MS) Ammonia
    was determined via the Techmon Auioanalvzer
    Inorganic materials released during UCG were evalu-
    ated bv a laboratory procedure Residues irom the gasinca-
    non process were simulated bv preparing representative
    samples ol coal char and ash VII media were prepared
    from pulverized lignite which passed a 16 mesh screen
    Ash was prepared bv healing the pulverized coal to about
    "1*1 C ,n in i tcii urn ie, 'or ' * H ("h lr was Tcrar. '
    through pvrjlvsis in a nitrogen lur.ewnvr. jt "ml t_ or
    about two hours Thexe residues were then contacted with
    a water approximating the local natural groundwater qua-
    lity The contacting was periormed bjtchwise with varying
    amounts of residue in ^50-500 ml of water The sampler
    were placed on a shaker table at X*C for 72 h. The
    samples *ere then tillered and the nitrate analyzed fur
    maior inorganic ions and TOC
    To evalu He the torpinc eapacif. ol (he su/roune/mo
    three strata were tested elav jboic (he Iieriie elav nei»*
    the lignite and lignite In each case increasing amounti
    ol meelia were allowed lo equilibrate with a sample of eon-
    laminated groundwater \gain samples were shaken lor
    '2 h at .0 C then tillered ind inalv/eti lor inoiganic .on«
    and TOC
    Sorption experiment were pedormed i>n three Jnlefi.ni
    Ivpes ol eontammated groundwate' two ji -vnien *c:c
    prepared in the laboratorv to evaluate a wine ran« >>f
    concentrations for ammonia and TOC These samples were
    prepared by spiking water taken from a burn cavity with
    condensate from the product gas. The composition of three
    types of water is shown in Table I
    All samples of coaL clav and contaminated water used
    were obtained from Texas Utilities lignite mines and gosifl-
    cation site near Fairfield. Texas All chemical
    except GC-MS were performed in accordance widl the
    14th edition of Standard Methods or approved EPA
    methods
    RtSLLTS
    Sources oj pollutants
    A GC-MS analysis performed by the EPA lab if
    Houston. Texas provided a qualitative measure of the
    types ol organic pollutants released during gastnea-
    tton Figure I shows a GC-MS trace of a samp*
    taken from an unconiaminaied observation well
    100
    £ 40
    Complex mixture o 1 ftsmi
    (poMiOiy aoi«nc actd esters)
    Saturates and
    unsotu/oteo
    hydrocarbons
    - x , Mixed
    pnenon
    t*3uTvl onenoi
    di-C4 Thiooene
    
    -A	)'
    di-Bufyi
    onrnoiotft
    ¦K5 60 sO 00 -20 i40 oO
    5oecr,jm numcer
    Fii; I GC-MS jajKm* outline
    [5-346]
    

    -------
    (uounilw r..i pplliMjni* i»t*m uiH,wi:rna' 0 v«> il . Mik nion
    0henontnrene or onrnrocene
    C. olkyi noonttoienes
    Esrer di Ce ajetore
    '5err>ops oflipote^
    4 Ring son sucn os
    na3h*P«acene or Dervzanthrocene
    HyC.)
    2C..-C,.)
    Caroazoie
    Sulfur
    /HydrocarBons
    SuDSTd Oyraiole
    Mernyi noDtnols
    C, and C, alhyt
    pngnsis ana crescis
    o-/)3-Nooirioi
    C^ard C6oiXyl Denjenej
    C„ ana C. aikyi \
    or oiconois
    '4 Ring pari/ / 1
    pyrene)
    oenzenes
    
    F12 J GC MS .inaksiv Lontjinin.niDn alicr iM-atiijnon
    These oreamcs mav represent baseline levels prior to
    ,jS1f,cation The relatively high proportion of phenols
    in this sample is indicative of nearh\ lignite deposits
    Fieure 2 is a GC-MS trace of a groundwater sample
    uUn dircctK from a burn Lam\ The organics in
    [his trace are identified b\ broad Jasses of com-
    pounds and undoubtedly man\ more specific com-
    pounds could be identified with increased GC resolu-
    non A large proportion of the burn cautv oreamcs
    jr; pohnuclear aromatic hydrocarDoris (PAHi
    Phenols constitute only a small portion of the total
    organics in the burn cavity
    The nature of the inorganic pollutants From the
    leachate of the gasification residue was studied
    through extraction experiments summarized in Table
    3 Ash was the major source of inorganic pollutants,
    primarily sulfate, calcium and hvdroxide Compared
    io the ash, char and coal had little elTect on the
    groundwater quality It should be noted that under
    conditions of the laboratory experiments, a significant
    amount of TOC was released from the lignite which
    explains why the baseline ^ater qualitv included fairly
    high organic concentrations
    The data shown in Table J indicate a decrease in
    calcium and sulfate with increasing amounts of ash
    A similar trend with talcum and alkalinity is seen
    in tht i.hur i_\irauions Prixipilanon hi Ljlcium
    sulfate and calcium Ljrhonale fTm 1. * plain these
    phenomena It should also be re-emphasi/ed thai ifu
    prepared gasini.ation residues uonlriDute insignificant
    amounts of ammonia and m the case of i_har and
    ash little TOC Thus the maior source of ammonia
    and TOC must be condensed gases produced during
    gasification
    Sorption capacity of strata
    Orgamcs Sorption isoiherms for organics were pre-
    pared from batch equilibrium data in three separate
    tests. Tests I. II. and III were performed using differ-
    ent proportions of bum cavity water and above-
    ground condensate as indicated in Table 2 All tests
    showed the surrounding media to have capacity to
    sorb orgjniLs Figures .*-i show the data plotted as
    Freundbch isotherms
    It is apparent that the sorption charactensucs of
    the organics in Test III were significantly different
    Table 3 Leachate extractions of gasification residues
    Residue pH Alkaline SO; C!" Na' Ca** Mg" K." NH,-N TOC
    gml"' uniis mel"1 CaCOj mgi"1 mgr1 mgl"1 me I"1 mg I"1 mgl"1 rilgl"' mgl"1
    total
    phenophihalien	Ash
    192
    101
    144
    96
    1450
    60
    414
    564
    10
    47
    0 34
    63
    94 1
    97
    104
    64
    1700
    48
    370
    585
    14
    38
    017
    63
    547
    91
    48
    20
    2020
    48
    346
    660
    188
    32
    0 20
    69
    blank
    78
    184
    0
    15 5
    34
    33 4
    22 4
    23 8
    25
    —
    69
    
    
    
    
    
    
    CTiar
    
    
    
    
    
    75 7
    96
    31
    10
    50
    184
    258
    20 2
    32
    —
    014
    69
    37 B
    97
    65
    15
    42
    88
    31 1
    94
    174
    —
    015
    69
    185
    915
    104
    7
    37 5
    65
    32 0
    64
    23 2
    —
    011
    76
    blank
    it 45
    196
    J
    30
    33
    31 7
    190
    266
    —
    012
    12
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Lignite
    
    
    
    
    
    68 1
    6 55
    144
    0
    420
    44
    444
    35
    62
    —
    
    107
    35 0
    6 75
    13!
    0
    220
    67
    38 4
    67 5
    39
    —
    1 4
    60
    176
    71
    127
    0
    no
    37
    345
    26 5
    24
    —
    04
    35
    blank
    8 45
    196
    5
    30
    33
    31 7
    190
    266
    —
    012
    12
    [5-347]
    

    -------
    466
    MlCHAlLJ HLMI-MCk and C Fletchkr Mattox
    too
    o
    h—
    9
    s
    03
    -
    Ills*
    ~ /
    -
    ° /
    
    o
    
    a
    
    a
    
    o
    o
    
    A
    0 Type I Water -
    
    a Type HWoter
    
    o Type 21 Water
    
    0
    » t t
    10	60 100
    Equilibrium TOC, mq 1 '
    Fig. J TOC isotherm lioiite
    loo
    J o
    O Type I Water
    a Type K Water
    a Type HI Water
    I
    l
    10	30	60 lOO
    equilibrium TOC, mq I. 1
    Fig. -1 TOC isotherm clav jboie lignite
    than those tn Tests i and II T<.pc 111 'Aster (used
    in Test III) contained the largest fraction of con-
    densed organics and the data indicate these com-
    pounds may be less adsorbable than those found in
    the bum cavity Analysis of the lignite isotherm and
    the clay isotherms for Type III water indicates lignite
    was a more efficient sorbent than either of the clays,
    which are almost identical.
    A fraction of the organics may be nonadsorbable.
    For example. Fig. 3 shows that none of the tests were
    able to lower the equilibrium TOC concentration
    below about 25 mg I"1 Future work is directed
    toward identifying the specific organics which are not
    so r bed
    Inorganics Although accurate characterization of
    ion exchange behavior requires the determination of
    selectivity coefficients for the exchanging ions, the dis-
    tribution of solute species between sold and aqueous
    phases can also be described by the use of sorption
    isotherms. For the purposes of the paper, adsorption
    isotherms were used to approximate and identify the
    ion exchange behavior
    Table 4 summarizes the results from one of the
    sorption experiments on Type II water The data
    indicate that canon exchange occurs with all strata
    The divalent cations, calcium and magnesium, are
    released from the solid phase concomitant with an
    uptake of monovalent cations (sodium potassium, and
    ammonia) from the liquid phase Of special signifi-
    cance is the uptake of ammonia by lignite and clay
    Freundhch-tvpe isotherms for the uptake of mono-
    valent cations are shown in Figs 6-8 for Type 1 and
    II waters.
    Inorganic anions exhibited less interaction with the
    media than the cations Chloride and sulfate concen-
    trations remained essentially oonstani throu^nom itl
    tests. These ions may be considered conservative
    solutes, and therefore will have relatively high
    groundwater mobility
    Alkalinity species (bicarbonate and carbonate! de-
    creased with increasing ratios of media to water,
    espeaally lignite These data are explained by the
    probable precipitation of calcium carbonate, neutral-
    naoon of alkalinity by surface acidic groups on
    lignite and some ion exchange
    10 0
    60
    30
    X
    O
    w
    c
    e»
    "S.
    TJ
    ¦S t o
    5
    m
    U
    ^ 06
    o
    £
    0 3
    01
    Equilibrium TOC, ffiq I
    Fig 5 TOC isotherm clay below hkjniic
    O Type I Water
    a Typ« H Water
    a Type QZ Water
    60
    30
    [5-348]
    

    -------
    (iroundu jtrr •!lui • ni» from rvrr.•¦iikI i. m1 l' imI'ic I'lun	4r
    fable 4 Tom II \otni.rnv>
    
    pH
    Alkalinit\
    so.
    CI
    Sj
    Ml' *
    Cj" •
    k ¦
    \H. \
    roc
    j;m 1
    units
    mg i ' CjCO,
    mc 1 '
    mc 1 1
    mg 1 '
    me 1
    mg !"1
    mg 1"'
    mg 1"'
    mc 1 1
    —
    
    
    
    CIjv M.jm
    helow liunilt.
    
    
    
    
    |0U)
    79
    424
    438
    195
    142
    77 U
    101
    20 7
    14
    16 1
    507
    7 3
    520
    430
    240
    145
    66 0
    61 6
    25 4
    5S
    16 1
    ;78
    80
    472
    430
    260
    153
    61 6
    41 6
    270
    7S
    34 6
    13-
    8 05
    520
    415
    220
    164
    45 6
    33 4
    28 5
    92
    15 7
    73 5
    3 05
    626
    428
    380
    175
    380
    590
    31 1
    136
    67 9
    0
    3 35
    718
    365
    220
    185
    158
    210
    377
    208
    176
    
    
    
    
    Licniii
    
    
    
    
    
    k90
    ^ ¦"
    l /
    326
    400
    225
    122
    62 5
    198
    167
    30
    26 8
    447
    80
    306
    400
    180
    129
    48 5
    125
    197
    48
    21 4
    \'-
    79
    29S
    410
    205
    137
    37 6
    93 0
    21 8
    68
    196
    109
    77
    356
    410
    270
    173
    28 6
    71 0
    260
    96
    28 6
    57 5
    7 85
    416
    410
    200
    164
    22 3
    56 6
    290
    122
    —
    0
    s:
    662
    365
    200
    182
    158
    26 0
    36 7
    200
    134
    
    
    
    
    Clav stain
    above lignite
    
    
    
    
    97:
    3 05
    2""0
    421
    395
    123
    66 0
    102
    173
    32
    :& s
    50:
    s;
    <64
    438
    185
    129
    63 5
    74 0
    21 S
    42
    23 6
    
    X 1
    406
    405
    210
    142
    56 0
    36 6
    24 5
    126
    2s b
    i:9
    s:s
    530
    443
    210
    175
    ."OS
    '9 4
    29 5
    I0S
    429
    75 0
    S 30
    514
    405
    200
    167
    >9 6
    424
    29"
    1 '6
    Ml 4
    0
    S3
    728
    3KS
    
    182
    16 h
    23
    
    192
    16-
    • Value suspect probable analwical error
    Groundwater mobility of solutes
    "Hie distribution coefficient. k„ is a useful par-
    ameter in comparing the relative groundwater mobi-
    lity of various solutes. The distribution coefficient is
    defined as the ration of the solute in the solid phase
    10 that in the liquid phase
    , me solute adsorbed/ke media
    mg
    solute in soluuon
    The higher the distribution coefficient, the less mobile
    the solute In general, (he distribution coefficient is
    a function of the nature of the solid and solute and
    the equilibrium concentration of the solute
    Figure 9 shows the distribution coefficients for the
    data taken in this work. In all cases pulverized lignite
    is a more efficient sorbent than the clay This does
    not imply pollutant migration is greater in clav for
    two reasons First clav is a much more effective h\d-
    z
    •1" 0 6
    03
    Type I Wotor
    OCloy below lignite
    a Lignite
    10	30	GO 100
    Equilibrium NH4 concentrotion, mg l"
    Fig. 6 Ammonia isotherm.
    30
    i i T
    Type II Woter
    OCloy below lignite
    a Lignite
    10	30	60 iOO
    Equilibrium K* concentration, mg {'
    Fig. 7 Potassium isotherm
    [5-349]
    

    -------
    MichailJ HuvthMCK and C Fi i- r t ¦ ii r M\rro\
    i 0
    I	I
    Type I and E Wofer
    OClay Delow lignite
    a Lignite
    20	100
    Equilibrium Na*" concentration.
    Fig. 8 Sodium isotherm
    roloyiL.iI barrier than lignttc Groundwater velocities
    are greater in the more permeaole lignite strata
    Second, lignite surface area available for sorption is
    increased through pulverization, while 'hat of the clay
    is unaffected by laboratory preparauon. Field surface
    area must be correlated to laboratory surface area
    before rates of pollutant migration in lignite strata
    can be predicted.
    It is also apparent that organics were among the
    least mobile solutes studied, while conservative anions
    such as chloride and sulfate and the divalent
    calcium ind magnesium are among the most moh:^
    solutes
    CONCLLSIONS
    I The impact ol LCG on groundwater qu.iln, ,
    potentiallv damaging It is a function, to a Ur;
    extent, of the local subsurface environment, and ua
    be minimized by careful site selection.
    I Major groundwater pollutants resulting from
    UCG include oolvnuclear and phenolic oreinic v.rr»
    pound-, ammonia suilate ^alc.um and nvdr.n .
    The source of inorganic pollutants is primunlv jvfs
    leachate. while the source ol organics and ammunj
    is primarily condensed vapors.
    3 For all all solutes studies, pulverized lignite !ui
    a higher capaatv for sorption of pol'utants tlun
    either of the two adjacent elav seams
    •I Adsorption ol organics bv clav and lignite n ji
    erfective removal mechanism', however some TOC
    mav be nonadsorbable
    5	The transport of inorganic cations is strong*
    aliened bv ion exchange Divalent cations were ten
    sistenllv released irom Jav and lignite and repl ufl
    bv monovalent canons \mmonia was siwnitii. in''•
    sorbed bv lignite and elav
    6	Anions exhibited less interaction with clay and
    lignite. Chloride and sulfate may be considered cu»f
    servauve ions wtth respect to sorption. Alkalinity
    creased upon contact with lignite, and to a smaller
    extent with clavs
    E
    9
    X
    (I ana H)
    ftjtassiufn
    (H) Ammonia
    t EE)
    Sodium _
    (I and II)
    -Lignife-
    ¦ Clay
    jl
    100
    Solute concentration, mq l
    Fig J Distrinuiion eocificienis for TO(
    iium ind ^Jium
    immonu potas
    REFERENCES
    ¦^"CampoellJ H & Washington H (1976) Preliminary lal**"
    atorv and modeling studies on the environmental imp*
    of m siru coal gasification Proceedings of the -»•
    Annua] Underground Coal Gasification Symposium.
    NJorgantown W Vj.. August. 1976
    vj Edgar T F Kaiser W R„ Thompson T W. Hurnen*
    VI J &. Grav K E (1977) In situ Conversion of Tc"J
    lignite to svnthetic fuels. Semi-Annual Repu"
    NSF-RANN Austin Texas, Janujrv. 1977
    Grove DB4WW Wood 11977) Prediction and W14'*
    tion of *ater qualitv changes during an jrii"1
    recharge neld studv unpublished draft for L'SGS. ^
    ^yHenrv J F (1976) Groundwater contamination	%
    situ coal gasification Laboratory studies. MS
    Univ ol Alaoamx June. 1976
    Viumenick VI J. (1976) Preliminarv results ol the
    lions from (jCG media. Presented ai the Semi a
    review meeting on in suu conversion of Texas IT^
    to svnthetic luels Sponsored bv NSF-RANN Do.'
    6. 1976
    Klimentov P P (1963) Influence of groundwater
    process of underground coal gasincatioa /if
    ULnen zjiendtnti Geoloona i xaziedka. 4 106- ^
    Kononov V [ (1964) Effect ol" artificial heat
    the formation and composition ol undefgroun
    and the underground water regime \ktid. Vuu*-
    35 UCRL Tra~ns-ias.sH 1975	„„
    Lai S H 3c Junnak J J H972) Cation adsorption '
    dimensional 'lo» througn Mills \ numi.rn.al
    Water Rtsi'ur	.X
    „ui«*
    [5-350]
    

    -------
    Groundwater pollutants from underground coal gasification
    469
    js I or Che mil a! -inahsts of '.later and Hastes. US
    "J ,.uroii"ien'a' Proirction Agency, 1974
    >;r- C F (19731 A L'jlerkiri-finite element simulation
    ' ! i;r<"""Jwiler contamination on Long Island. New
    k. H"»'r Rew 9 !957-69
    Standard Methods for the Examination of IVater and Hasff-
    water 14th Edition APHA-AWWA-WPCF 1975
    Wood W W (1977) Sulfate sorption during artificial
    rechajge. USGS unpublished paper
    •« i:-j—c
    [5-351]
    

    -------
    Section 5.4
    Spent Brine Return Flow Wells Supporting Data
    

    -------
    SECTION 5.4.1
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (OR SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    From Final Design for Arkansas'
    Class V Injection Well Inventory
    and Assessment
    AUTHOR:
    (OR INVESTIGATOR)
    Arkansas Department of Pollution
    Control and Ecology (ADPC&E)
    DATE:
    September 1985
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION: Arkansas, USEPA Region VI
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    Not Applicable
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES: Brine disposal injection wells are those
    used to inject spent brine into the same formation from which it
    has been withdrawn after extraction of the halogens. These wells
    comprise the majority of potential Class V wells in Arkansas.
    Seventy wells of this type are inventoried for Arkansas, and all
    are located in the southern counties of Columbia and Union. Four
    major companies own and operate all the wells.
    The Arkansas Oil and Gas Commission (AO&GC) dictates conscructicn
    requirements for these wells, and the State has concluded chat
    these requirements are adequate. Most wells have approximately
    60 feet of conductor casing, 500 to 1000 feet of surface casing,
    8000 feet of long string casing, and 2000 to 8000 feet of
    injection tubing. Tubing is either set with a packer and fluid-
    filled annular space, cemented, or set with no packer with an
    open annular space. Most wells are open hole completions.
    New brine disposal wells should be constructed with slight
    modification of AO&GC specifications, according to ADPC&E. To
    ensure protection of USDW, wells must be constructed so as to
    prevent fluids from escaping into untargeted formations through
    leaks in tubing, packer, and casing, or due to faulty cement.
    New construction requirements are specified in the report.
    The study indicates that because of the structural simplicity of
    the area in which injection of brines is occurring and that the
    integrity of the confining beds is very good, the potential
    impact of these wells on USDW is negligible if wells are
    constructed and operated properly. At the present time, ADPC&E
    is planning a more comprehensive sampling of Class V waste
    streams and also a more complete development of background data
    on chemistry of the original brines and injection formations.
    [5-353]
    

    -------
    TYPES OF CLASS V INJECTION WELLS WITH POTENTIAL FOR USE IN ARKANSAS
    Brine Disposal Injection Wells
    Brine disposal injection wells are wells used to inject spent
    brine into the same formation from which it was withdrawn
    after the extraction of the brine's halogens. 3rine disposal
    injection wells comprise the majority of Class V wells with
    potential for use in Arkansas. Therefore, aost of the
    emphasis of this inventory assessment is devoted to Class V
    brine disposal wells. Please bear in mind during the review
    of this assessment that the authority over Class V brine
    disposal injection wells is dominated by the AO&CC and that
    tr.is report consists largely o; suggestions as to .icw t.ie
    ADPCSE feels that all aspects of Class V brine disposal
    injection wells should be regulated.
    Seventy Class V brine disposal injection wells exist in
    Arkansas, all of which are located in Columbia and Onion
    Counties in south Arkansas. The ownership and operation of
    these wells is divided among four companies. These companies
    are: Arkansas Chemicals, Incorporated; Dow Chemical USA;
    Ethyl Corporation; and Great Lakes Chemical Corporation.
    Arkansas Chemicals Incorporated owns and operates three Class
    V brine disposal injection wells'in the Newell Field of Union
    County. Dow Chemical USA is responsible for eleven Class V
    brine disposal injection wells in the Xilgore Lodge Field of
    Columbia County. Ethyl Corporation is responsible for
    twenty-seven Class V brine disposal injection wells in the
    Kerlin Field of Columbia County. Great Lakes Chemical
    Corporation is responsible for twenty-nine Class V brine
    disposal injection wells between its three plants. Great
    Lakes South Plant operates six wells in the Catesville field
    of Union. County. Great Lakes El Dorado Plant is responsible
    for tmrteen wells in tr.e El Doraco Soutn field of Union
    County a-.c Grea- Lakes ".ves~ Plant is responsible for cen wells
    ir. zr.e Wilks, Garner Creet and Scr.uler Fields of Union County.
    [5-354]
    

    -------
    Potential Non-brine Class V Injection Wells
    Class V Injection wells with potential for use in Arkansas are
    listed below:
    1.	Air conditioning return flow wells - wells used to return to
    the supply aquifer the water used for heating or cooling in
    a heat pump?
    a.	Open-loop - water for the system is exposed to the
    atmosphere and potentially mixed with foreign substances
    between the supply and return wells;
    b.	Closed-loop - water for the system is not exposed to the
    atmosphere and not mixed with any foreign substances
    between the supply and return wells;
    2.	Cooling water return flow wells - wells used to inject water
    previously used for cooling;
    a.	Open-loop - water for the system is exposed to the
    atmosphere and potentially mixed with foreign substances
    between the supply and return wells;
    b.	Closed-loop - water for the system is not exposed to the
    atmosphere and not mixed with any foreign substances
    between the supply and return wells;
    -3. Drainage wells - wells used to drain surface fluid,
    primarily storm runoff, into a subsurface formation;
    4. Dry wells - wells used for the injection of wastes into a
    subsurface formation;
    ¦ 5. Recharge wells - wells used to replinish the water in an
    aquifer;
    6.	Sand backfill and other backfill wells - wells used to
    inject a mixture of water and sand, mill tailings or other
    solids into mined-out portions of subsurface mines whether
    what is injected is a radioactive waste or not;
    7.	Subsidence control wells - wells used to inject fluids into
    a non-oil or gas producing zone to reduce or eliminate
    subsidence associated with the over draft of fresh water.
    These wells are not used for the purpose of oil or natural
    gas production;
    8.	Radioactive waste disposal wells - wells used for the
    injection of radioactive wastes;
    9.	Experimental wells - injection wells used in experimental
    technologies; and
    10. Injection wells for in situ recovery of lignite, coal, tar
    sands and oil shale.
    These definitions, for the Ticst cart, were derived from 40 CF3
    146.05(d).
    [5-355]
    

    -------
    The Department has recently received requests for permission
    to operate several types of Class V wells other than brine
    disposal injection wells. The Arkansas Electric Cooperatives
    Incorporated received a state water permit to construct and
    operate two closed-loop cooling water return flow wells in the
    first half of 1985. A schematic diagram of this type well
    system is found in Figure 3. The ADPC&E also received a
    request in January, 1985 for permission to reenter an
    abandoned oil production well and convert it to a drilling
    fluid disposal well. This type of well would be classified by
    the Department either as a Class V experimental or dry well,
    or some sort of Class II injection well. The person making
    this request has not made any further attempts toward
    obtaining a permit since his meeting with the Department in
    January, 1985. The ADPC&E received another request from an
    oil company for permission to inject the contents of the
    reserve pit for a deep well drilled for gas production which
    resulted in a dry hole. The Department granted this company
    permission to inject the drilling fluid from the reserve pit
    into a particular formation in the well after a geologic
    evaluation of the request was completed. The company agreed
    to plug the well after injection according to the plugged
    regulations of the AO&GC. This' type of well is also
    classified by"the ADPCSE as either a Class V experimental or
    dry well, or some sort of Class II injection well.
    The ADPC&E has questioned the Arkansas Department of Health
    concerning cesspools and other devices that receive waste.
    The ADPC&E learned that the Health Department does not allow
    this type of injection well, nor does it permit septic system
    wells injecting waste from multiple dwelling or business
    establishments or community septic tanks. This inventory also
    revealed that although there is potential for the operation of
    the following wells in Arkansas, there are no known
    radioactive disposal wells, surface drainage wells, or aquifer
    recharge wells operating in the State of Arkansas.
    It is the intent of the ADPC&E UIC Program to continue its
    efforts to identify and maintain an inventory of all Class V
    disposal veils in order to assess and prevent potential
    threats to groundwater in Arkansasu
    EVALUATION OF CONSTRUCTION FEATURES
    Existing Brine Disposal Injection Wells
    The existing Class V brine disposal injection wells have been
    constructed using the construction requirements of the AO&GC.
    The construction of these wells, based on the available data,
    appears to be adequate. No cement logs were available,
    however, the records on the wells which were reviewed at the
    AGsGC, primarily -ell completion reports, were complete ar.d
    contained a considerable amount of detailed construction,
    ce~e n t i ng , casi ng and slugging ir.:::~a::on. A representative
    examc1e of a Class V 5 r ne disccsal in.;ecticn well, Great
    La'os' 3WD ^9*1, is illustrated m Figure 1. The diagram
    illustrates typical construction specifications for existing
    brine disposal wells. 'lost of the wells have approximately 50
    

    -------
    SURFACE INJECTION PRESSURE GAUGE
    9PEST BRINE
    ANNULUS PRESSURE GAUGE
    CONDUCTOR CASING SET AT 60'
    CEMENT TO SURFACE
    ANNULAR SPACE
    SURFACE CASING SET AT 1022'
    INJECTION TUBING
    ANNULAR SPACE
    CEMENT TO SURFACE
    LONG STRING CASING SET
    AT 8240'
    PACKER SET
    ABOVE INJECTION ZONE
    PERFORATIONS
    ;OPEN HOLE IN SOME
    CASES)
    T.D. 8148±
    EXISTING CLASS 7 BRINE DISPOSAL
    INJECTION WELL
    GREAT LAKES CHEMICAL CORPORATION1
    rIGL'RZ 1
    [5-357]
    3VD >/9M
    SCALE N'O^
    

    -------
    feet of conductor casing, 500 to 1000 feet of surface casing,
    8000 feet of long string casing and 2000 to 8000 feet of
    injection tubing. In several instances, approximately 4000
    feet of .intermediate casing were set with about 4000 feet af
    liner set from just above the base of the intermediate casing
    through to the bottom of the well.
    Tubing is either set with a packer and fluid-filled annular
    space, cemented in place by circulating cement to the surface,
    or set with no packer and with an open annular space. Several
    wells have been completed by perforation of the injection
    zone; however, most of the brine disposal wells are open hole
    completions.
    New Brine Disposal Injection Wells
    The ADPCSE suggests that new Class V brine disposal injection
    wells shall be constructed using a slight modification of the
    AO&GC construction requirements for Class II wells. Figure 2
    is a generalized illustration of the construction requirements
    for new Class V brine disposal injection wells. For all new
    Class V brine disposal injection wells, the following
    construction requirements should apply.
    To ensure the protection of USDWs, injection wells must be
    constructed in a manner to prevent injected fluids from
    escaping into untargeted formations through leaks in the
    tublar goods, packer, well casing, inadequate cement or faulty
    applications of cement.
    The construction requirements included in this section apply
    to all new Class V brine disposal injection wells under the
    UIC program.
    1)	The proposed injection formation must be separated from
    USDWs by one or more confining zones which meet the
    approval of the Director.
    2)	Casing and cement for the proposed well must be designed
    to protect USDWs, thus it is necessary to consider:
    a)	the depth of the well;
    b)	anticipated maximum and average operating pressures;
    c)	bottom hole temperature and pressures;
    d)	the hole size;
    e)	corrosivity of injection fluids and formation
    fluids;
    f)	1:t.u.olcgy of injection and confining ror.e strata;
    g)	types arid grades of csne-st to oe usee; and
    n) t".e exoectec: life of ere orojecc.
    [5-358]
    

    -------
    SURFACE INJECTION PRESSURE GAUGE
    ANNULUS PRESSURE GUAGE
    
    L^rf?
    CEMENT 10 SURFACE
    ANNULUS FILLED WITH
    FRESH WATER
    CARSON STEEL
    INJECTION TUBING
    CEMENT TO SURFACE
    PACKER SET WITHIN 1001 OF THE
    TOP OF THE INJECTION ZONE
    PERFORATIONS
    (TO BE DETERMINED FROM
    OPEN HOLE LOGGING)
    • « I •	•
    • • ¦ ¦
    SPENT BRINE
    CARBON STEEL CONDUCTOR
    CASING
    CARBON STEEL SURFACE CASING
    CEMENTED TO SURFACE - SET
    BELOW BASE OF USDW's
    FRESH WATER
    CARBON STEEL LONG STRING
    CASING CEMENTED TO SURFACE
    ccnstructic:: rzcuirememts for.
    NEW CLASS V BRINE DISPOSAL
    INJECTION WELLS
    SCALE. MONE	FIGURE 2
    [5-359]
    

    -------
    The casing ?iove the injection zone shall be sufficiently
    cemented by circulating cement with returns to the
    surface.Good quality cement is imperative to assure against
    fluid migration into untargeted zones. The quality should be
    sufficient to withstand the maximum operating pressure and
    should be resistant to degradation by native formation fluids
    and the injection fluids.
    On all newly drilled or converted, and all existing Class V
    brine disposal injection wells, injection must be through
    tubing set on a packer unless exception is granted by the
    Director. Packers shall be set no higher than 100 feet above
    the top of the injection zone.
    Well use may not begin until an appropriate permit is issued.
    After permit issuance, any proposed change or alteration to
    construction plans and specifications described in the
    application must be approved by the Director before being
    incorporated. Also, all phases, of well construction and
    testing must, if possible, be supervised by a qualified person
    who is knowledgeable and experienced in practical drilling
    engineering and who is familiar with the special conditions
    and requirements of injection well construction. Also, during
    the drilling and completion of Class V brine disposal
    injection wells, appropriate logs will be obtained and tests
    conducted as set forth in the mechanical integrity guidelines.
    [5-360J
    

    -------
    EVALUATION OF DRINKING WATER CONTAMINATION POTENTIAL
    Consequences of Injecting into the Intended Injection Zone
    The principal Class V brine disposal injection formation is the
    Smackover Limestone. The Smackover ranges in depth from about 7000
    to 9000 feet in South Arkansas. The Smackover is the formation
    from which the original brine is extracted. Once the bromine is
    stripped from the brine, the remaining brine is injected via Class
    V brine disposal injection wells back' into the Smackover. There
    are some Class V brine disposal injection wells which inject the
    spent brine into formations other than the Smackover Limestone.
    The other formations currently used as Class V brine disposal
    injection zones are, from deepest to shallowest: the James Memoer
    (limestone) of the lower Glen Rose Formation, the Tokio Formation
    (sandstone), the Blossom Formation (sandstone lateral equivalent of
    the Brownstown Marl), and the Graves Member(sandstone) of the Ozan
    Formation. Figure 4 illustrates the subsurface stratigraphy and
    the unit thicknesses of Mesozoic and Cenozoic strata of Columbia
    and Union Counties in south Arkansas. Figure 4 also classifies the
    strata as eitrier injection formations, confining Esnacions, or
    both. Wells which are in;acting into formations ct.-.er t.-.an :ne
    Smackover Limestone are m violation of 40 C?R 145.05 {i> il4!.
    Subsequent to tne completion of tnis reocrt, and in accordance v:-
    Part 2.G. of tne 1982 Amended Memorandum of Understanding -ewe**"
    the ADPC&E and the AO&GC, the ADPC&E will inform the AO&GC of the
    wells that have been found to be operating in violation of 40 CFR
    146.OS (e) (14) as this is a matter which falls under the
    jurisdiction of the AO&GC. The ADPC&E will also inform the AO&GC
    of all the available options.
    Seventy Class V brine disposal injection wells are known to exist
    in Arkansas. Five of the seventy have been plugged and abandoned.
    All but five of the remaining sixty-five Class V brine disposal
    injection wells listed in Appendix A inject only into the Smackover
    Formation. Ethyl Corporation is responsible for three of the five
    wells and Great Lakes Chemical Corporation is responsible for the
    remaining two.
    Two of Ethyl Corporation's wells, BDW (L.E. Christie) *6, which
    injects into the Tokio Formation, and BDW #13, which injects into
    the Tokio Formation, the James Member of the lower Glen Rose
    Formation, and the Smackover Formation, are currently being
    considered for a permit to operate as Class I waste disposal
    injection wells. BDW #6 injects a sludge of tail brine solids once
    every two or three years. This well will not be issued a permit to
    operate as a Class I well and will ultimately have to be plugged
    and abandoned. BDW #13 is presently operating as a Class V orine
    disposal injection well pending its being permitted as a Class I
    waste disposal injection well. Ethyl's BDW #3 is said to have been
    plugged and abandoned, but the records at the AO&GC, as illustrated
    in Appendix A, show that the well has only been plugged back from
    its original Smackover completion to a much shallower depth. The
    formation to which BDW #3 was plugged back to is unknown at this
    time, however, the depth indicated, 4150 feet, is approximately
    where one would expect the Tokio Formation or the James Member of
    the lower Glen Rose Formation to be.
    [5-361]
    

    -------
    C.t (>u|>
    Formation
    Member
    Max imum
    Thickness
    Union County
    Thickne&a
    Columbia County
    Thi ckness
    Conflning
    Zone
    Injectior
    Zone
    Llaibornu
    Cockfield (Sand)
    
    200*
    100'
    
    
    
    Cook Mtn. (Clay)
    
    150'
    100'
    
    
    
    
    Sparta (Sand)
    
    900'
    600'
    
    
    
    
    Cane River (S» & CI
    )
    700'
    300'
    140'
    
    
    
    Carrizo (Sand)
    
    400'
    ?
    ?
    ¦
    
    (Mlt i>x
    (Sand & Clay)
    
    10001
    500'
    700'
    
    
    Midway
    (Clay|
    
    600*
    4 00 1
    4 50'
    J
    
    
    Arkadelphia Marl
    
    150'
    150*
    150'
    /
    
    
    Nacatoch (Sand)
    
    600*
    200'
    250* - 305'
    
    /(Class I
    Saratoga Chalk
    
    150'
    40 •
    140'
    /
    
    Marlbrook Marl
    
    200*
    eo' - 200'
    130* - 180'
    /
    
    
    Annona Otalk
    
    100'
    50'
    100*
    /
    
    Ozan (Sand fc Clay)
    Meakin
    300'
    200*
    
    
    / (Class 1
    (Shale)
    /
    
    Graves
    
    /
    (Dlousora) (Sand &
    Brownatown Marl
    -1 ay)
    250*
    150'
    (fir
    /
    ownstown Ma
    /
    FT|(Blossom)
    Tokio (Sand)
    
    350'
    200'
    
    
    /
    Woodbine {Clay}
    
    250*
    150'
    
    /
    
    TriniLy
    Glen Hose
    Upper /Marine
    Glen Rose\ Shale &
    -imefltone )
    0' - 350'
    0' - 500'+
    /
    
    (Masaive Anhydrite
    Ferry I.ake Anhydrit
    j
    2500'
    0' - 500•
    0' - 340'
    /
    
    ROdessa
    or Lower
    lien Rose
    • r
    Bexar Sh
    0' - 900'
    750* - 1100'
    /
    Bexar Sh.
    /
    James Ls.
    James La
    0* - 1100'
    llouBton (Shale & Sa
    ndstone)
    400' - 1900'
    900' - 1900'
    /
    
    ( ot.ton Val It
    iy]Cotton Valley jSh.
    I.s. & Sb.[
    1400'
    1600' - 2550'
    1500' - 2500'
    /
    
    
    Uuckner (Sh. & Anhy
    )
    275'
    60' - 190'
    100' - 260*
    /
    
    Sinackover (I.imeston
    
    900'
    680' - 925'
    455' +
    
    /
    
    1 s _M i 1 lajSa.jS
    i. t Sa 1t & _Anhyd . \
    1250*
    1000' - 1290'
    t-
    
    
    FICURE 4
    
    
    
    
    

    -------
    Great Lakes Chemical Corporation owns two Class V brine disposal
    injection wells which are not completed for injection into the
    Smackover Formation. One of Great Lakes' West Plant wells,
    Belinger Estate 41, injects into the Graves Member of the Ozan
    Formation, the Blossom Formation, and the Tokio Formation. Another
    of Great Lakes' wells which is located at the El Dorado Plant, SWD
    #8, is a dual completion and injects into the Meakin and Hogg
    Members of the Ozan Formation and into the Smackover Formation.
    The geology of the area in which all Class V brine disposal
    injection activity occurs is relatively simple. The lack of
    structural and stratigraphic complexity in the geology of south
    Arkansas makes the area very favorable for (JIC practices. Figure 5
    shows the major regional structural geologic features in relation
    to the area in which all Class V brine disposal injection activity
    occurs, the area around El Dorado and Magnolia, Arkansas.
    The integrity of the confining beds is very good. The confining
    beds are dominated by very slightly porous and permeable sediments.
    a	^ V CCC2SS 1CT21 OC^OliS 3 p ^
    peneaola lenticular oodles of rock which ars neit.ner laterally ncr
    vertically extensive. Some tnic!< (2CC- feet), regionally
    extensive, porous and oremeable zeds do exist in the succession of
    sediments aoove cr.e Smacicver, ou: tr.ey are ail well cor.firec oy
    sediments of low pores, ty ard perr-.eaci 1 icy, t.-.s most aour.dant
    sediments of this succession.
    The Midway Group consists of 400 to 600 feet of low permeability
    gray and blue clays. The lower 50-75 feet of the unit consists of
    calcareous clay and marls in Union County and interbedded sandstone
    and limestone in Columbia County. The Midway Group is the thickest
    and most important of the confining zones as it forms the main
    basal confining bed for fresh groundwater aquifers in Union and
    Columbia Counties. The Midway separates underground sources of
    drinking water from aquifers which may be used for underground
    injection because the water contained within them is not of useable
    quality. The ADPCSE voiced it's agreement with the AO&GC in June,
    1984 that no underground injection of any kind will be allowed
    above the base of the Midway Group in south Arkansas unless it is
    specifically approved on a case-by-case basis by the Director.
    As long as the Class V brine disposal injection wells are
    mechanically sound, the potential impacts of the injection fluid on
    nearby underground sources of drinking water are negligible or
    nonexistent.
    The Sparta Formation is the principal source of municipal and
    industrial water supply in Union and Columbia Counties. The base
    of the Sparta Formation is approximately 1,500 feet above the top
    of the Midway Group. There are approximately 6,000 feet of
    sediments separating the top of the Smackover from the base of the
    Midway Group. A total of approximately 8,000 feet of sediments
    separate the top of the Smackover Limestone and the base of the
    Sparta Formation in the areas where Class V brine disposal
    injection occurs.
    [5-363]
    

    -------
    H
    I
    L-	<
    k
    llllA M T 1
    «i> '
    c oV>'/
    r^VAll^y
    <
    f EMM '- $
    ' '
    /
    ft J( A M S A 5
    /'
    - \
    in
    I
    w
    a>
    v^- -r\
    "/ <<#u'	
    osyNc
    / N /£'"'#• 4 xy?\ y "^5,5S
    jo '?/&
    7							
    f	
    \0* / .
    rN ^ '
    *A\. •
    ixtf, ••
    Cc\\ '.
    5 \ P ? \ |
    ¦\ y A M A
    I	U;
    I 0jt t-
    *nr
    mOHIIOE
    UI»LIFTi
    ofo ^
    niCML'AUO y»"
    UPLIFT
    JACKSON
    UPLIFT
    SABINE
    k •', "V- p
    ,/;? ii
    LI, ANO
    uri irf
    / L 0 U \l S I A N A
    OUTtINC MAP
    FIGURE 5
    ( I Ml AY , 1949)
    MAJOR STRUCTURAL FEATURES
    SOU flic AN ARKAHJAi AND ADJOINING AftfAS
    UOOIMIO AM(1 U(>(A AHO )(U 4AU)
    AfAll 1*40
    l(>l< •• M |(|
    

    -------
    The closest Class V brine disposal injection zone to the base of
    the Sparta Formation is the Meakin Member of the Ozan Formation.
    Approximately 2,200 feet of sediments separate the top of the
    Meakin from the base of the Sparta in Union and Columbia Counties.
    Nearly 45% of these sediments act as low porosity and permeability
    confining- zones. The Meakin lies approximately 850 feet below the
    base of the Midway Group in Union and Columbia Counties. Over 50%
    of the sediments between the top of the Meakin and the base of the
    Midway Group act as low porosity and permeability confining zones.
    At the present time, no pressure build-up calculations have been
    done for the Class V brine disposal injection wells. This is due
    to the lack of available pressure information at the time that the
    data for this report was collected. The ADPC&E would like to
    compile this pressure build-up information in the future either as
    an addendum to this report or just as suplementary information to
    help the Department secure a better grasp on Class V brine disposal
    injection well operations in Arkansas.
    On October 1 and 2, 1984, Wayne Thomas, ADPC&E Petroleum
    Technician, collected samples of the spent brine at the Class V
    brine disposal injection well operation bromine plants in southern
    Arkansas. The sample collection locations and the chemical
    analyses cf the sa.-.ples (per;cttsg at tr.9 ADPC&E! cr.emistry Lao in
    Little Rcc<) may oe found in Aopendix C. 7u.e geochemical reactions
    oetween injeccec wastes and formation fluics have not yec. been
    determines zzr tr.e folic-:ng reasons:
    1.	It is not certain wnether or not the samples collected on
    October 1-2, 1934 contained a complete representation ci tne
    volatile organics which were originally sent to the
    pre-injection brine storage basins. There is a possibility
    that some volatile organics were volatized upon entering the
    storage basins or while being stored in the basins.
    2.	The ADPC&E has not yet acquired any background chemical
    analyses on the formation fluids of the injection zones.
    3.	The ADPC&E has not yet acquired any background chemical
    analyses on the original brine.
    4.	The ADPC&E plans-to do a more comprehensive sampling of the
    Class V brine disposal injection well waste streams .and also
    to develop background data on the chemistry of the original
    brine and of the injection formations. This also may be
    either an addendum to this report or just supplementary
    information to give the Department more control over the
    Class V brine disposal injection well program.
    [5-
    

    -------
    SECTION 5.4.2
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (OR SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    Memorandum to Wayne Thomas,
    Petroleum Technician for the
    Arkansas Department of Pollution
    Control and Ecology (ADPC&E)
    AUTHOR:
    (OR INVESTIGATOR)
    Jay Justice, Hazardous Waste
    Chemist (ADPC&E)
    DATE:
    January 17, 1985
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION: Arkasnas, USEPA Region VI
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    Results of Analysis of Samples
    Taken October 1-2, 1984 at the
    Bromine Plants in Southern
    Arkansas
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES: Results are presented for samples of brine
    injection fluids at six facilities. Analyses are grouped into
    four categories:
    1.	Volatile Organics (Method 8240)
    2.	Base/Neutral Extractables (Method 625)
    3.	Acid Extractables (Method 625)
    4.	Heavy Metals (Methods 7130, 7190, and 7420)
    [5-366]
    

    -------
    ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT 07 POLLUTION CONTROL AND ECOLOGY
    MEMORANDUM
    TOt	Wayne Thomas, Petroleum Technician
    FROM:	Jay Justice, Hazardous Hast® Chemist
    DATEj January 17, 1985
    SUBJECT: Results From Analyses on Samples Taken October 1-2, 1984 at
    the Bromine Plants in Southern Arkansas
    The analyses that were done on these samples can be grouped into
    the four catagories listed belowr
    1)	Volatile Organic® (Method B240 £1]>
    2)	Base/Neutral Extractables (Method S23[2])
    3)	Acid Extractables (Method 625[2])
    4)	Certain Heavy Metals (Methods 7130C1], 7190C1], 7420C1J)
    The results of theso analyses are as followsx
    Great Lakes - South Plant
    Sample Labeled "Tail Brine After Treatment"
    1} Volatile Organics — none detected - less than 30 ppb
    2)	Base/Neutral Extractables - none detected - less than 20Oppb
    3)	Acid Extractables - one compound detected - not halogenatedi
    estimate concentration to be is order of 230 ppb - 750 ppb
    4)	Heavy Metals -
    Cadmium - less than 0.5 ppm Copper - 2.5 ppm
    Chromium -	2.5 ppm Lead - 12.5 ppa
    Great Lakes - Marysville Plant
    Sample Labeled "Tail Brine After Treatment"
    1)	Volatile Organics - none detected - less than 50 ppb
    2)	Base/Neutral Extractables - nose detected - less than 200 ppb
    3)	Acid Extractables - none detected - less than 200 ppb
    4)	Heavy Metals —
    Cadmium - less than 0.5 ppm Copper - 3.5 ppm
    Chromium -	2.0 ppm Lead - 19 ppm
    Great Lalcas - Main Plant
    Sample Labeled "Tail 3rina Frca-2zcains Tcwsr"
    1) Volatile Organics - zcze detected - less than 50 ppb
    [5-367]
    

    -------
    Page 2
    2)	Base/Neutral Eztractables - none detected - less than 200 ppb
    3)	Acid Eztractables - Mvtn compounds detected; three of these
    compounds were brominated; estimate concentration of each
    compound to be less than 230 mg/1.
    4)	Heavy Metals -
    Cadmium - less than O.S ppm Copper - 2.3 ppn
    Chromium 'less than 2.0 ppa Lead - 17.3 ppa
    In addition this sample contained what 1 believe to be elemental
    bromine.
    Dow Chemical - Magnolia
    Sample Labeled "Pump Discharge to Reinfection Field"
    1)	Volatile Organics - none detected - less than 50 ppb
    2)	Base/Neutral Eztractables - none detected - less than 200 ppb
    3)	Acid Eztractables - Four compounds detected; two of these were
    brominated; estimate concentration of each compound to be less
    than 230 ppb..
    4)	Heavy Metals -
    Cadmium - less than 0.5 ppm	Copper - 2.5 ppm
    Chromium -	4.5 ppm	Lead - 9.5 ppm
    Ark Chem Inc.
    Sample Labeled "Tail Brine From Pumping Station to Reinfection Field"
    1)	Volatile Organics - none detected - less than 50 ppb
    2)	Base/Neutral Eztractables - none detected - less than 200 ppb
    3)	Acid Eztractables - none detected — less than 200 ppb
    4)	Heavy Metals -
    Cadmium - less than 0.5 ppm	Copper - 1.5 ppm
    Chromium -	3.0 ppm	Lead - 17.3 ppm
    Ethyl Corporation - Magnolia
    Sample Labeled "Tail Brine From Pump Station to reinfection Field"
    1)	Volatile Organics - compounds present included dibromochloromethane
    [3] and bromoform [33; estimate concentration of each compound to
    be less than 100 ppb.	'
    2)	Base/Neutral Eztractables - 5 compounds detected) none of these
    compounds were brominated; estimate concentration of each compound
    to be less than 250 ppb.
    3)	Acid Eztractables - line compounds detected; seven of these
    compounds were brominated; the compound with the highest
    concentration was Broaoform £3]; ewtfs-te concentration to be less
    than 230 ppb.
    4)	Heavy Metals -
    ~ I233 thas 0.3 ppa	Copper - 1.5 vvm
    Chromium -	4.5 ppm - Lead - 12.5 ppa
    [5-368]
    

    -------
    JJW-3	Page 3
    CI] Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Wast* Physical/Chemical Methods
    SW - 846 2nd Ed.
    [2] Methods for Organic Chemical Analysis of Municipal ani Industrial
    Wastewater SPA - 600/4-92-037
    £3] Tentatively identified, not confined with standards
    JJ/jtb
    cci Cheryl Terai
    A.L. Sparks
    [5-369]
    

    -------
    APPENDIX C
    Results From Analyses of Brine Disposal
    Injection Well Injection Fluid
    [5-370]
    

    -------
    
    PLUCCINC DETAILS
    
    
    Well Home
    PluRKlnK Duti
    Plugging Details
    
    J.O. UuLoach II
    6/27/8)
    Production Plug
    Preuli Water Plug
    Surface Plug
    Ul]0l-e400'
    654'-1050'
    5 sacks
    BUU 11
    BUW 1)5
    4/20/74
    1/8/82
    PBTD Plug
    llale Pilled with
    Water Plugs
    41S0'-4720'
    7492'-8000'
    4l48'-4278'
    11' plug In top of 10 )/4" casing
    BOW 141
    2/17/8)
    Hole Filled with
    Uttter Plugs
    8204'-8S90'
    17* plug in lop of S 1/2" casing
    CI
    • i.| i t i | iiurudo Plan^~	SWD 13	11/12/80	1300 aacka Halliburton Lite - cop @900', 20 yarda of watth
    rock on top of cement, 9 5/U" rubber plug on top of rock,
    5 eacko cedent plug froa tup of rubber plug to aurface.
    Top of wall la aealad by a welded aetal plate.
    on
    I
    u
    

    -------
    APPENDIX B
    Class 7 Brine Disposal Injection Well Plugging Details
    [5-372]
    

    -------
    SECTION 5.4.3
    TITLE OF STUDY:
    (OR SOURCE OF INFORMATION)
    Development of a Two Aquifer
    Contaminant Plume: A Case
    History
    AUTHOR:
    (OR INVESTIGATOR)
    P.L. Campbell and J.V. Kinsella,
    D'Appolonia Waste Management
    Services, Baton Rouge, Louisiana
    DATE:
    Not Aval 1 able
    FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION: Not Applicable
    NATURE OF BUSINESS:
    Not Applicable
    BRIEF SUMMARY/NOTES: This paper examines the consequences of
    injection well failure on surrounding aquifers and remedial
    methods available.
    Waste fluids were being injected into a saline aquifer at depths
    from 1900 to 2400 feet when a casing rupture was detected at
    a depth between 140 and 212 feet. Injection fluid was noted at
    the surface 100 feet from the injection well.
    Investigation revealed that injection fluids had leaked into a
    system of fine to medium sands underlying a laterally
    discontinuous clay layer. The fluids migrated upward until the
    clay layer was encountered, then migrated horizontally to a
    point where the clay layer pinched out. Contaminants migrated
    through the natural break into shallower sands, and a two-aquifer
    plume developed. Plume, geometry, migration rate, and the
    ongoing cleanup efforts are reviewed.
    [5-373]
    

    -------
    Development of a Two Aquifer Contaminant Plume:
    A Case History
    Pressley L. Campbell and John V. Kinsella
    D'Appolonia Waste Management Services, Baton Rouge, Louisiana
    Deep well injection of hydrocarbon waste streams is a common form of
    waste disposal. This paper examines the consequences of injection veil
    failure on surrounding aquifers and the methods used to remedy the
    situation.
    The project site is underlain by a complex sequence of alluvial sands,
    silts and clays. Waste fluids are injected into saline aquifers via
    several veils at depths ranging from 1,900 to 2,400 feet below ground
    surface. A ruptured casing leak from one of the wells was identified at
    a depth between 140 and 212 feet below ground surface. The leak was
    discovered when injection fluid appeared at the ground surface
    approximately 100 feet from the well.
    A hydrogeologic investigation program was initiated to determine the
    extent of contamination of near surface aquifers. The shallow
    subsurface geology consists, from the surface downwards, of
    approximately 30 feet of gray silcy clay overlying 25 - 30 feet of fine
    ailty sand (40-fooc sands). Underlying the 40-foot sands is a clay
    layer that is laterally discontinuous and varies in thickness from 0-5
    feet. ?ine to medium grained sands, up to 100 feet in thickness,
    underly the clay (100-foot sands). The 40 and 100-foot sands constitute
    the near surface aquifers and act as one hydraulic unit where Che
    intermediate clay is absent.
    The investigation revealed that waste fluid had leaked into the 100-foot
    sands and travelled vertically upwards under pressure until it
    encountered Che intermediate clay layer. Contaminants then migrated
    horizontally beneath Che clay until they reached a point where the clay
    layer pinched out. Contaminants migrated through this natural break
    into the 40-foot sands. A two aquifer contaminant plume subsequently
    developed. This paper discusses the plume geometry, rate of migration
    and ongoing cleanup effort.
    Biographical Sketches
    Dr. Campbell holds three degrees in Civil Engineering (Water Resources)
    from Carnegie-Mellon University. He has more than ten years experience
    in eight states completing multidisciplinary projects in hazardous waste
    disposal, water resources, hydrology, hydrogeology, computer programming
    and client-agency liason. Dr. Campbell waa the lead engineer in the
    analysis, design, construction and operation of over 20 waste disposal
    facilities.
    [5-374]
    

    -------
    Mr. Kinaella has a B.A. (Geology) from Trinity College Dublin and an
    M.Sc. (Hydrogeology) from the University of London. He has over six
    years experience working on a variety of hydrogeological projects
    ranging from water resources studies to computer modeling of groundwater
    contamination.
    Mailing Address/Phone Number
    D'Appolonia Waste Management Services,
    A Division of IT Corporation
    8116 One Calais Avenue
    Suite 2D
    Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70809
    504/769-9700
    [5-375]
    ID! X-'PIPT >'J jOVI •
    

    -------