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 henln,lined
tr.inMiiissivuv andsinr.ige v,illiesol
II 050 tipd'lt .melt) 17 resp«ttivel»
lor the Hidden Water ( reek Mine,
and 172 upd/li and 0 23^ respet
tivclv lor the Hiuliorn Mine These
data iikIk ate (hat spoils at the Big-
horn Mine have a post mm inu trans-
nussivitv comparable lo ihat ol the'
unnuned formation while spoils at:
Ilie Hidden Water Creek Mm have
a transmissivitv much luuhi. liian
pre-nuningi onditions 1 he~»c differ-
ences were attributed to the method
ol spoil placement and resultingdif-,
ferences in compaction of the back-
filled material Generalizing front'
these findings scraper-emplared
spoils can be expected to have post-
mining iransnussivmes similar to
pre-mmmg conditions Drag-
iine-emplaced spoils (an be expected
to exhibit transmissivuic- much
hmher than m the pre-milium state
IKahn 1976)
\ an Voast investigated >poils at'
the Vbsaloka Rosebud BigSkx and
Decker Mines in southeastern Mori*
tana Spoil saturation was found at
allfoursites Aquifertestingat thest
sites indicated that on the average;
spoil transmissivm is comparable
to that ol the unmmed coal (Van
Voast et al 1978)
Based on these earlv findings,
three assumptions regarding the
development of backlill aquifers
have been made almost universally
among operators in the Powder
River Basin ol Wvommg Tliev are
1) backfilled spoil materials will
resaturate 2) a single backlill aqui-
ler w ill lorm vv Mhin (hespoils vviiha
water level approachinu pre milling
¦100 GWMR/Wmter 1983
r 5—io c
-------
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 •
------- |