THE MEEKER WELL' AND OTHER PHBsOMENA
IN THE VICINITY OF THE MEEKER DOME,
RIO BLANCO COUNTY, COLORADO-
A SUMMARY REPORT ON THE FEASIBILITY
OF CONTROL OF SEEPAGE OF SALINE
GROUND WATER
TECHNICAL SUPPORT BRANC
SURVEILLANCE AND ANALYSIS DIVISION
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION VIII
-------
THE MEEKER WELL AND OTHER PHENOMENA
IN THE VICINITY OF THE MEEKER DOME,
RIO BLANCO COUNTY, COLORADO -
A SUMMARY REPORT ON THE FEASIBILITY
OF CONTROL OF SEEPAGE OF SALINE
GROUND WATER
TECHNICAL SUPPORT BRANCH
SURVEILLANCE AND ANALYSIS DIVISION
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION VIII
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, Colorado 80203
December 1972
-------
ABSTRACT
The occurrence of saline seeps in the vicinity of the Meeker
Dome, near Meeker, Colorado in 1970 caused concern, as expressed
by the State of Colorado and landowners. Of special concern was
the fact that the seepage occurred less than two years after the
plugging of the so-called "Meeker Well" and the Kritsas #1 and #2
wells. Questions arose, obviously, as to whether "replugging of
wells would correct the problems caused by seepage and whether land-
restoration (to agricultural productivity) methods were available.
The Environmental Protection Agency was asked to take the lead in
developing answers to the questions.
This report draws upon volunteer efforts by representatives
of the State Water Conservation Board, the U.S. Geological Survey,
the Bureau of Reclamation, and EPA. The significant conclusion is
that the seepage of saline ground water to the ground surface appears
to be the surface exhibition of a return of the Meeker Dome area to
pre-dri11ing hydrologic equilibrium. The equilibrium is a function
of saline water under pressure at depth and natural fractures which
allow this water to reach the ground surface. While all of the wells
in the area, including a brand new dry hole, may or can serve to
connect deep aquifers with shallow aquifers we cannot substantiate
this possibility with sufficient certainty to permit endorsement of
any "replugging" efforts.
Land-restoration methods for a plot of irrigated farmland were
elimintated as too complex. Restoration of access to an irrigation
ditch appears feasible. Speculation as to the possibility that
seepage into the irrigated land can be reduced through the use of
upslope drains still exists.
Salinity measurements along the White River showed increases
of total dissolved solids (a gain of 89 tons per day), sodium (21
tons per day), chloride (29 tons per day), and sulphate (24 tons per
day). These increases appear to be about one-half of the increases
in the same parameters measured prior to plugging the "Meeker Well."
Reconmendations include those related to continued monitoring
to insure that degradation of the White River may be forestalled.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. Abstract i
II. Introduction 1
III. Background 1
IV. Results of Recent Investigations 10
A. Results of Infra-red Imagery Aquisition
in the Vicinity of the Meeker Dome 10
B. Specific Conductance and "Salinity"
Measurements in the Vicinity of the Meeker
Dome 23
C. Results of Reconnaissance Drainage
Investigation on Upper Prather Property
(Seepage Area #4) 35
V. Summary 36
VI. Conclusions 38
VII. Recommendations 39
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Number Page
1. Location Map Showing Areas of Localized Seepage. . 2
2. Traces of Possible Faults in Vicinity of the. . . 5
Meeker Dome
3. An Overlay - Location of Photos and Base Map. . .11,
4. Location of October, 1972 Conductivity 24
Measurements
5. Specific Conductance Measured in White River. . . 29
and Tributaries, October 18-20, 1972
6. Linear and Transient Variations in Specific ... 32
Conductance during October, 1972 Survey
7. Average Annual Sodium and Chloride Concentrations . 34
in White River "Near Watson, Utah" 1960-1972
8. Location of Auger Holes and Possible Subsurface. .
Drain - Seepage Area #4
9. Stratiaraphic Section through Meeker Dome (2 sheets)
in pocket
LIST OF TABLES
1. Chronological Summary of Reported Events in . . .3
the Vicinity of the Meeker Dome
2. Chemical Quality of Saline Seepage in Vicinity . . 8
of Meeker Dome
3. Conductivity Reconnaissance of "Meeker Well"Area . 25
4. Chemical Data for White River - October 1972. . . 30
Samples
5. Comparison of Increase in Salinity Measured ... 33
in October, 1972 with that Measured Prior to
Plugging the Meeker Well
iii
-------
LIST OF PHOTOS
Number Page
1. Meeker Wei 1 Site 14
2. Two Views of Meeker Dome 15
3. (3a & 3b) "Spotted" Field arid Areas of Seepage. ... 16
4. East End of Upper Prather Property 17
5. Upper Prather Property 17
6. (6a & 6b) Upper Prather Property 18
7. Nelson Property 18
8. Nelson Property 19
9. Mosaic View of Drainage - Northside of Dome 21
10. Kritsas #2 Well 20
LIST OF PLATES
Number
1. Location of Geologic Section In Pocket
2. Geologic Section Across Meeker Dome In Pocket
iv
-------
INTRODUCTION
On September 1, 1971, representatives of the Environmental
Protection Agency accompanied representatives of the Bureau of
Reclamation on a brief inspection of four areas of ground water
seepage occurring east of Meeker, Colorado, near the White River.
Subsequently, interest in and concern about the seepage increased
to the point where, on June 15, 1972, the interested parties met
in Meeker to agree upon a course of action that might resolve
questions regarding the need to replug the so-called "Meeker Well"
and the possibilities of controlling the ground water seepage. At
that meeting, it was decided that EPA would serve as a lead agency
in the collection of field data that were necessary, in turn, to
clarify the hydrologic situation in the vicinity of the Meeker Well.
This report presents the water chemistry and aerial infrared imagery
obtained by EPA to assist in the clarification. This report also
draws upon efforts of the Colorado Water Conservation Board, the
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, and the U.S. Geological Survey in an
effort to present a current evaluation of the hydrologic system of
the Meeker Dome.
BACKGROUND
The area of the Meeker Dome and areas of ground water seepage
are portrayed in Figure 1. With the assistance of reports from
Carter Hutchinson and Gene Hampton, a chronological summary of the
pertinent events taking place in this area is contained in Table 1.
The "Meeker Well" was reentered and then grouted in August of
1968. Prior to the sealing, water quality data had been collected
from upstream and downstream locations to evaluate the impact of the
discharge from the flowing well on water quality. Along a 25 kilo-
meter reach of the White River, which received the discharge from the
well, the river gained an average 55 tons per day (tpd) of sodium,
65 tpd of chloride, 80 tpd of sulphate, and 280 tpd of dissolved
solids prior to plugging. Calculations showed the Meeker Well
effluent equalled about 87 percent, 108 percent, 32 percent, and
54 percent of these increases, respectively.
The well was plugged in August, 1968 under Specifications No.
400C-381 of a Small Business Contract administered by the Bureau of
Reclamation. To achieve the plugging, the Meeker Well was first
redrilled to 294 meters (with a concurrent increase in water discharge
from the original 3 cfs to about 9 cfs). With much trouble, packers
were sequentially set a 166 meters and 59 meters and the well was
cemented shut. The plugging resulted in the cessation of surface
flow and in a decrease in salts entering the White River. The
decrease amounted to 44 tpd (tons per day) of sodium, 57 tpd of
chloride, 37 tpd of sulphate, and 68 tpd of dissolved solids or
1
-------
-------
TABLE T
CHRONOLOGICAL SUMMARY OF REPORTED EVENTS
IN THE VICINITY OF THE MEEKER DOME
1¦ ~1881 - Warm salt springs along the White River between Sections 20
and 29 (TIN, R93W) reportedly used for bathina by the Indians. Farm-
ing in southeast quarter of Section 20 reportedly difficult "because
of the black shale."
2. 1915 - "Meeker Well" drilled to a depth of 560 meters by cable tool
on the George Russell property The oil test hole encountered warm,
mineralized water. Some question still exists as to (1) whether
another well was drilled at about the same location a few yeare later
and plugged and (2) whether the "Meeker Well" was cased. (No casing
was found during the reentry operation. Location: NW-1/4 Section 29
(TIN, R93W).
3. 1917-20 - Marland Oil Company well drilled in NE-1/4 NE-1/4 SW-1/4
Section 20 (TIN, R93W). Encountered warm, mineralized water with a
head of about 1.5 meters above surface casing.
4. ca. 1927 - Local ranchers constructed dam downstream of Marland well
to impound discharge
5. 1945 - Scott well drilled, center NE-1/4, SW-1/4 Section 20 (TIN, R93W);
later plugged; date of plugging not known but suspected to be in 1945
6. 1957-60 - Kritsas #1 and §2 wells drilled by cable tool:
§] - NW-1/4 SE-1/4, SF-1/4, Section 8 (T1S. RQ3W).
82 - SW-1/4, Section 17 (TIN, R93W).
7- l955-57James well drilled, center SE-1/4, Section 29 (TIN, R93W). Plugged '57
8. 1967-8 - The "Meeker Well" was "rediscovered." On May 9, 1968, the
well was discharging 3-cfs of brackish water with a concentration of
19,200 mg/1 of dissolved solids. The discharge was estimated to add
57,000 tons of dissolved solids per year to the White River In
November 1967, the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration made
funds available iur Water Quality Research-Demonstration Projects and
requested that the Bureau of Reclamation select pilot projects to test
and demonstrate methods designed to reduce the salinity load m the
Colorado River system The plugging of two wells, one of which was
the "Meeker Well," was selected.
9 July-Aug 1968 - With the concurrence of the Colorado State Engineer's
Office, the Bureau of Reclamation contracted to cease the surface flow
at the well head The well was plugged from somewhere below 166 meters
to the surface and measurable or discernible flow v.-as stopped
10 Feb 1969 - Bureau of Reclamation confirmed that the Kritsas wells,
located on the north side of the Meeker Dome, were flowing. There was
no flow from these wells in August 1968.
11. Fal1, 1 969 - Kritsas wells plugged.
12. Mar 1970 - Saline seepage from south side of Meeker Dome reported.
Inspected by Bureau of Reclamation.
13. Hay 1971 - Increased seepage reported
14. Sep 1971 - Area reinspected by Bureau of Reclamation and EPA.
15. 1972 - Problem the subject of numerous meetings and discussions. Head
in unplugged Marland Well found to be increasing.
^ ' D>'co Petroleum drilled wildcat well on north side of Meeker Dome.
1.D about 1650 msters
3
-------
67, 73, 20, and 11 percent reductions (respectively) in the loads as
measured at the downstream sampling location. The reductions in
sodium and chloride corresponded very well with the before-plugging
loads added by the discharge from the well.
The plan to plug the Meeker Well was initiated with the full,
written, concurrence of the Federal Water Pollution Control Agency,
the Bureau of Reclamation, and the Colorado Division of Water
Resources.
The Meeker Dome is the topographic expression of a local anti-
clinal uplift which appears to involve all of the sedimentary strata
reportedly encountered at depth to about 700 meters. The Meeker
Well and at least the Kritsas #1 well are believed to encounter the
following formations in order of increasing depth: Dakota (sand-
stone and shale); Morrison (shale and sandstone); Curtis-Entrada
(sandstone); Chinle (shale); Shinarump (conglomerate); Moenkopi
(sandstone and shale); Weber (sandstone), and Maroon (sandstone and
siltstone). The Entrada and Weber Formations are considered aquifers
in the area. Most of the "deep" wells drilled on the Dome have been
reported as encountering saline water under pressure at depths
corresponding with these aquifers. A more recent dry hole, drilled
to a total depth of about 1800 meters, confirmed this sequence.
Most such geologic domes are usually fractured as a result of
the intense and localized deformation occurring during uplift. At
times these fractures are radial in location, on other occasions they
trend in a transverse direction across the topographic high. The
Meeker Dome has undergone insufficient exploration to allow identifi-
cation of any large fractures or faults. An unverified alignment of
large-scale topographic lineations in the vicinity of the Dome
suggests at least three major lineaments across the Dome, one along
the White River which coincides with the probable formation contact
(east-west trend), one N50°W through the Dome (Sections 20) and one
N20°E across the White River and into the Dome. Smaller normal
faults have been identified along the south flank of the Meeker Dome
and are shown as solid lines on Figure 2. The occurrance of Mancos
Shale on the Dome makes it difficult to identify any displacements
on top of the Dome. While recognizing that these lineaments have
not been identified in the field, their locations as sketched
(Figure 2) may bear some close relationship to certain of the areas
of seepage, especially if the fault along the White River does, in
fact, exist. An important and as yet unanswered question also exists
as to the depth of such faults since if they are deep, they may serve
as the primary paths for water to reach the surface.
Subsequent to the plugging of both "Meeker" and Kritsas wells,
specific areas of saline ground water seepage were reported to the
4
-------
FIGURE 2
TRACES OF POSSIBLE FAULTS
IN THE VICINITY OF THE
MEEKER DOME.
-------
Bureau of Reclamation (Table 1). Field investigations conducted in
1971 further confirmed the existence of four areas of saline ground
water seepage along or near the north (or east) bank of the White
River, and adjacent to the Meeker Dome. Those areas are shown in
Figure 1 and may be described as follows:
X)
Anderson #1 drilled by Willard Rease for Dyco Petroleum Company,
in September'and October, 1972, Section 17, TIN, R93W.
6
-------
Seepage Area 1: SE1/4, SW1/4, SE1/4, Section 19, TIN, R93W,
0.7 km west of "Meeker Well," south of Colorado Highway 132.
Seepage of saline water is occurring along the toe of the
bluff (and the highway fill) for a horizontal distance of
about 60 meters. This seepage appears to reach an irrigation
ditch ("Sheridan-Morton") which parallels the River at this
point. The ditch access road appears to have been detri-
mentally affected by this seepage such that access by vehicle
is not possible.
Seepage Area 2: "Meeker Well" Site; SW1/4, Section 20 and
NW1/4, Section 29, TIN, R93W, north of Colorado Highway 132,
4.7 km east of Meeker, Colorado. A swampy area exists to
the west of the plugged well and saline runoff is directed
under the Highway at the west end of the open area, 150
meters west of the marker pipe for the well. Seepage has
been noted along the north bank of the White River opposite
(south) the plugged well.
Seepage Area 3: "F. Nelson, Lower Prather Property;" NW1/4,
NE1/4, Section 29, SW1/4, Section 20, TIN, R93W, south
Colorado Highway 132, 0.8 Kilometers east of "Meeker Well."
A low pasture area which reportedly received seepage. A
drainage ditch leading west from the area contains saline
water, much of the lower field appears saturated. Actual
seepage into the area was not noted during field investiga-
tions though the swampy portions of the field contain
saline water.
Seepage Area 4: "Upper Prather Property;" SE Section 20
and NE Section 29, TIN, R93W, south of Colorado Highway
132, 1.3 kilometers east of "Meeker Well." A previously-
irrigated and farmed field receives saline seepage from
the area bordering Colorado Highway 132 on the south. The
head irrigation ditch contains saline water. Newer areas
of seepage have occurred near, but upslope from Coal Creek.
Seepage Area 5: "Curtis Creek-Kritsas Wells;" Sections
17 and 8 TIN, R93W, north of local road, about 2.2 kilo-
meters east of Colorado Highway 13-789 and 2.5 kilometers
north-northeast of "Meeker Well." In September of 1971,
the gully to the north of the well site of Kritsas #2 was
wet near and downstream of the well though no seepage
specifically from the well could be found.
Chemical analyses have been performed on water samples collected
from these areas of seepage and from other locations. The majority
of these data are reported here in Table 2. Some variations in the
data may have been caused by the method of analysis (field vs. laboratory)
7
-------
TABLE 2
CHEMICAL QUALITY OF SALINE SEEPAGE IN VICINITY OF MEEKER DOME
(See Text for Location of "Areas")
SEEPAGE AREA 1
AREAS. "Irrigation Ditch"
AREA 2
"Meeker Well" Area
AREA 3
"Nelson Panch"
Parameter
(mq/1)
3-17-701*
5-4-7223
field analysis)
3-17-70^
10-11-712)
11-20-71
5-3-722^
Afield analysis)
Ml-1233
3-17-7013
0
1
1
11-20-712J
5-3-722)
(field analys1sj_
7-ll-723)
Ca
1,128
2,739
864
2,140
2,700
2,397
870
464
6,440
7,600
6,848
2,500
Mq
388
215
_
_ _
_ _
200
320
..
..
..
790
Na
5.520
6,200
5,520
2,880
5,000
2,397
5,ino
794
3,700
3,400
2,600
4,200
K
63
71
^ _
m _
60
39
46
hco3
112
—
214
—
—
—
209
583
—
—
--
331
CI
8,910
10,000
7,469
8,800
8,760
8,180
7,900
717
9,500
10,650
6,818
l2,non
Co
o
-fck
3,694
2,724
4,258
3,000
3,050
3,220
3,100
2,647
2,450
2,350
2,300
2,100
TDS
18,780
29,160
16,990
19,350
19,100
23,088
5,030
19,280
22,400
25,110
..
F
0.6
1 6
1.4
1 .6
2 0
0.2
0.8
_ _
1.1
Fe
_ _
1.3
.03
ND
m
_ _
_ m
0.15
0.40
1.2
0.11
ulgC03
_ _
2,397 I
199
219
685
_ _
_ _
640
1 .190
3,082
B
| _ _
_ _
0 88
..
..
„
0.24
„
„
Br
_ _
„ _
_ _
..
9.6
_ _
„
„
12
Conductanc
(limhos/cm
l
i "
36,000
—
23,800
25,730
31 ,200
26,100
—
23,800
27,560
31,000
32,200
11 21 31
ND: Not Detected 'Bureau of Reclamation 'Colorado Water Conservation Board 'USGS
-------
TABLE 2 (continued)
SEEPAGE AREA 4
AREAS: "Prather Property"
AREA 5
"Krltsas Wells" (Sprlnq nr {2)
MARLAND WELL
NE-NE-SW TIN R93W
Parameter
3-17-701*
5-4-722)
(field analysis)
7-11-723*
5-4-72^
(field analysis)
7-11 -7235
Ca
1,136
1,370
480
1,370
<»90
Mq
364
660
..
130
Na
1,656
16
2,600
5,900
6,100
K
39
12
^ _
5?
HC03
445
404
36
CI
4,260
3,636
2,800
7,878
7,900
so4
1,551
4,800
5,400
3,084
3,000
TDS
9,890
23,650
F
0.7
3 3
Fe
1 2
15 3
2.2
.06
MgC03
...
3,766
685
B
..
__
__
--
Br
—
4.8
9.2
Conductance
(Jjmhcrs/cm)
18,000
15,300
29,200
26,500
ND Not Detected ^Bureau of Reclamation ^Colorado Water Conservation Board ^USGS
-------
and by small changes in the sampling locations. The apparent time-
dependent variation in calcium and sodium concentrations at the same
locations is of interest. Other measurements seem to be in fair agree-
ment with the possible exception of the 3-17-70 measurements of TDS and
chlorides at Area 3 (5030 and 717 mg/1) which are quite low compared to
the later measurements. However, this again may be a function of sampling
location. No consistent set of chemical relationships have been derived
for the seepage areas sampled. Suffice to say that the quality of the
seepage water is not good.
The Dyco hole, Anderson #1, encountered water in the Morrison, the
Entrada, and in the Weber Formations. No water quality samples were
obtained to our knowledge.
No data were collected prior to the plugging of the "Meeker Well"
that could serve to verify a relationship in time between the seepage
and the plugging of wells drilled near the Meeker Dome. More importantly,
no official report describing the hydrologic condition of the Dome before
drilling commenced has been found. A Mr. Arthur Wilbur of Meeker has
reported to Gene Hampton of the U.S.G.S. that warm salt springs along the
White River between Sections 20 and 29 (TIN, R93W) were used for bathing
by Indians around 1881.
The remainder of this report presents the results of more current
efforts to both evaluate the hydrologic system around the Meeker Dome
and to explore methods of controlling problematical seepage.
RESULTS OF RECENT INVESTIGATIONS
Results of Infra-red Imagery Aquisition in the Vicinity of the Meeker Dome
In order to better assess the geohydrologic situation extant around
the Meeker Dome, EPA requested that its Field Investigations Center at
Denver acquire and interpret low altitude infra-red imagery of the Dome
area including the areas of seepage and the White River. The area was
flown on August 7, 1972. Selected photographs from this mission are pre-
sented here (photographs are contained in our copies of the report). The
general views of the photographs are positioned on Figure 3 and its overlay.
Noteworthy features of these photographs are the areas of seepage and
"distressed" vegetation. The infra-red film was used to assist with the
identification of areas of seepage to the surface (presence of water at
the ground surface and the presence of chlorophyl) and degradation of
foliage (lack of chlorophyl). Surface accumulations of salts were also
noted.
10
-------
FIGURE 3—OVERLAY
LOCATION OF PHOTOGRAPHS
NOTE: Arrows indicate direction
of view; Photo number
corresponds to text.
+
pMOTM f ~
-------
FIGURE 3 BASE MAP
LOCATION OF PHOTOGRAPHS
-------
The "Meeker Well" site is shown in Photograph 1 (print numbers
185-7 and 185-8). The well is located in the turnout near the dark,
straight material (timber or pipe?) stored on the ground (arrow on
right). Seepage appears to occur into the swampy area to the left
(west) of the well and saline water drains to the White River through
the ditch leading from under the highway opposite the left end of the
"swamp" (arrow on left). The fact that seepage has previously been
noted along the north bank of the White River, near the well, suggests
further that the relatively vigorous vegetative growth near the well
and leading toward the River is related to seepage. Note that some
of this more vigorous vegetative growth correlates with a lineation
across the highway. This may be the location of the old culvert
which carried the discharge from the well into the White River.
Photograph 2 consists of two prints (185-25 and 185-26) which
give a perspective of the Meeker Dome from the northeast flank
looking southwest J) The White River (flowing to the right) may be
seen at its intersection with the power transmission lines along
the rear side of the terraced channel. This White River terrace in
"Agency Park" is notable. The spots in the light-colored fields are
generally considered to be "wet spots," possibly related to ground
water seepage. The fields on the top of the Dome were not irrigated
at the time of the inspection.
Photograph 3 consists again of two prints (185-29 and 185-30)
which provide a view of the Meeker Dome from the east and show some
apparent deficiencies in an irrigation ditch. Photograph 3a shows
one of the fields previously viewed in Photograph 2 and also shows
an irrigation ditch which runs along the east side of the Meeker
Dome. The change in color downhill from the non-irrigated land to
the irrigated land is notable. Photograph 3b is used to point-out
two locations where significant quantities of water appear to be
leaking from the ditch (the middle arrows) and other areas of
possible seepage (outside arrows) both from the ditch and from the
Dome. Note also that the upper left corner of Photograph 3b shows a
portion of the upper Prather property and a similar change in color
between the areas above and below the irrigation ditch.
Photographs 4 through 8 portray the upper Prather property, or
Seepage Area 4, in more detail. This area is located along the south-
east flank of the Meeker Dome and is drained by Coal Creek as shown
1) Note the plume from the asphalt batch plant in the upper left of
the photographs. Temperature inversions cause significant
concentrations of the particulate material discharged.
13
-------
- ~ ¦'ifVi^r ¦
Photo 1 (185-7 and 185-8)
"Meeker Well" Site - August, 1972
White River in foreground, looking
North. Well site & surface drain
indicated by right & left arrows
-------
Photo 2 (185-25 and 185-26)
Two views of Meeker Dome from
the northeast showing cultivated
areas - August, 1972.
-------
Photo 3a (185-29)
"Spotted" Field on Meeker Dome showing
"wet" areas.
Photo 3b (185-30
Seepage Areas near Irrigation Ditch,
east side of Meeker Dome.
-------
Photo 4 (185-1)
East end of Upper Prather Property.
Seepage Area #4 - August, 1972.
Photo 5 (185-2)
Upper Prather Property - Seepage Area #4.
Coal Creek below white area - August 1972.
-------
Photo 6a (185-3)
Upper Prather Property - west end.
Seepage Area #4. Confluence of Coal
Creek & White River - August, 1972
Photo 6b (185-6)
Upper Prather Property - Seepage
Area #4. True color - August 1972
-------
Photo 7 (185-4)
Nelson Property - Seepage Area
#3 east end. Vehicles at camp-
ground area - August, 1972
Photo 8 (185-5)
Nelson Property - Seepage Area
#3. Area bounded by roads and
northern (upper) meander of
White River - August, 1972.
-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY
-------
in Photos 4 through 6. Photographs 7 and 8 also show the Nelson
property which has been referred to previously as Seepage Area 3. As
noted, the color distinction between irrigated and non-irrigated land
is great (Photograph 4; 185-1) thouqh a true color photograph
(Photograph 6b, 185-6) shows a somewhat similar distinction. Photos
5 and 6a (185-2 and 185-3) give the best portrayal of the impact of
saline seepage on the tract of land between Colorado Highway 132 and
Coal Creek. This dark area shows a definite downhill trend with a
minor seep indicated to the east of the ranch road near its junction
with the irrigation ditch. No indication of equally-stressed areas
was found to the south of Coal Creek.
Photographs 7 and 8 (185-4 and 185-5) progress downstream from
the previously described views to include the Nelson property or
Seepage Area 3. This area is low-lying land bordered by the highway
embankment and shale in the background and the White River in the
foreground. Seepage may occur along the embankments in the background
but much of the discoloration below and to the west of the vehicles is
caused by deposition of weathered shale derived from the embankment.
Some textural variations in the color of the vegetation on the
property is diseernable, but no indication of impacts similar to that
shown to the east (on the upper Prather Property) is evident.
Photograph 9 is comprised of 12 prints (185-9 through 185-19 and
185-21) which can be pieced together in a rough mosaic. The resulting
photograph provides a view of the north side of Meeker Dome extending
approximately from Colorado Highway 13-789 on the right (west) to the
Kritsas #2 well on the left (east). The mosaic then covers the
majority of the drainage path from the north flank of the Meeker Dome
to Curtis Creek with the "upstream" direction to the left. We believe
that the most important features shown in this view are the two
degraded stream-reaches which appear as yellowish-green and brownish
areas near the Kritsas #2 well (two arrows on left) and in the area
where the stream intersects the road. The "distressed" area in the
foreground originates from the vicinity of the Kritsas #1 well. The
red-orange colors that denote the stream elsewhere suggest more
vigorous vegetation. The distressed vegetation appears to be the
result of the intrusion and evaporation of saline water since the sur-
face soil is encrusted with salt. The relatively vigorous vegetative
growth appears to be related both to an interception of shallow ground
water by certain stream channels and by recent rains. More localized
areas of ground water seepage are evident along the right (east) side
of the mosaic while the red-orange color reappears in the gulleys at
the extreme right of the photograph. This color-response also appears
related to recent precipitation (note that a similar color respense
is shown along the edges of the highway near the Kritsas Well). The
ponded area is located at the toe of one of the lineations referred
to in the earlier section on "Background."
22
-------
Photograph 10 is another composite (prints 185-22 through
185-24) which present another view of the Kptsas §2 well as identi-
fied previously on Photograph 9. Notable is the apparent inflow of
saline water on the right (east) side of the mosaic (see arrow). The
change in color along the drainage near the Kritsas §2 clearing is
quite evident.
In sunrnary, the infra-red imagery indicates that the ground
surface of the Meeker Dome intersects the local water table in
locations both along the south and north flanks of the Dome and that
some of the seepage has caused varying degrees of distress for native
and introduced vegetation. The areas of seepage as shown by the
photographs correlate with the findings of on-site inspections
though the seepage seems greater on the top and north side of the
Dome than was suspected. Limited review of the imagery has not
revealed any new information regarding the structural fracture
system of the Meeker Dome.
Specific Conductance and "Salinity" Measurements in the Vicinity of
the Meeker Dome.
During the period 18-20 October 1972, Mr. Robert Fox of EPA
measured the specific conductance at numerous points along the White
River to determine the impact on water quality of saline discharges
on that reach of the River (Figure 4). These data are presented in
Table 3 and are graphically summarized in Figure 5. The data
reflect an increase in salinity which is further quantified in
Table 4. This Table presents sodium, chloride, and total dissolved
solids data for samples collected from the White River on October 18
and 19 upstream and downstream of the areas of active seepage.
The specific conductance data in Figure 5 are presented in terms
of either average conductance across the channel or as a single
measurement, usually made near the north or east bank of the White
River, the bank closest to the areas of seepage identified to date.
The average flow in the White River was 520 cfs during the period of
measurements (18-20 October 1972) Figure 5 also contains selected
measurements of specific conductance made by the Colorado Water Con-
servation Board (Mr. Carter Hutchinson) in May of 1972 (3-5 May) and
October, 1971. The May measurements showed appreciably lower
(25 percent) conductance than was measured in October of 1972. But
the River flow in May was on the order of 710 cfs or 27 percent
higher than in October. Since salinity concentrations in the White
River are known to vary inversely with flow, the difference in con-
ductance between May and October may be expected as the result of
higher flows in May.
23
-------
:\ i V-. " -- V
* V ^ Q * ••
^vv>V_ X
r'Vv yrS';S'
-------
TABLE 3
CONDUCTIVITY RECONNAISSANCE OF
"MEEKER WELL" AREA
Meeker, Colorado
October 1972
°C ^mhos/cm
Temp. Coriduc.
Station Date Time
Location
WR-40
WR-2
WR-3
WR-4
D-5
\\
WR-6
CC-7
-Progressive Downstream Order-
10-18 1415 10.5 350
1820 -- 370
10-19 0733 - 380
0733 - 380
1145 - 370
" 1832 — 380
10-20 0815 - 380
1210 — 370
10-18 1746 IT.0 360
10-19 1126 9.5 370
10-19 0906 8.5 380
10-19 0918 8.5 380
10-18 1802 10.5 930
10-19 0922 9.0 800
10-19 0925 8.5 385
10-18 1758 11.5 2750
10-19 0848 9.5 2790
East bank - Upstream US6S stream
gaging station.
East bank
East bank
West bank
East bank
East bank
East bank
East bank
Midpoint of bridge at farm 400
meters upstream of Coal Creek
confluence with White River.
East bank - 30 meters downstream
of WR-2.
East bank - 120 meters downstream
of WR-3.
Irrigation ditch - 20 meters up-
stream of confluence. Ditch is
located just south of Coal Creek.
20 meters downstream of D-5;
2 meters from east bank.
Coal Creek - 30 meters upstream of
confluence with White River.
25
-------
Table 3 - page 2
Station
Date
Time
OC
Temp.
iJmhos/cm
Conduc.
Location
-Progressive
Downstream Order-
WR-8
10-19
1000
9.0
*1165
East bank - 45 meters downstream
from Coal Creek.
ir
II
0940
9.0
* 740
5 meters from east bank.
II
it
1000
9.0
* 595
1/4-pt. of stream (from east).
II
n
1000
9.0
* 380
1/2-pt.
II
ii
1000
9.0
* 380
3/4-pt.
II
ii
1000
9.0
* 380
West bank.
D-9
10-19
1017
10.0
2740
Drainage ditch just below WR-8.
WR-10
10-19
1025
9.5
*1010
45 meters downstream from WR-8;
3 meters from bank.
WR-11
10-19
1030
9.0
560
60 meters downstream from WR-10.
WR-12
10-19
1036
9.0
560
45 meters downstream from WR-11.
WR-13
10-19
1045
9.0
500
60 meters downstream from WR-12.
D-14
10-19
1051
9.5
1120
Drainage ditch entering entering
White River 15 meters downstream
from WR-13.
WR-15
10-19
1057
9.0
485
30 meters downstream from con-
fluence of ditch.
WR-16
10-19
1415
9.5
605
90 meters downstream from WR-15.
WR-17
10-19
1436
9.5
510
Apprx. 200 meters downstream
from WR-16.
WR-18
10-19
1444
9.5
530
Apprx. 100 meters downstream
from WR-17.
WR-19
10-19
1452
9.5
500
30 meters downstream from bridge
on private driveway.
WR-20
10-19
1456
9.5
500
Directly opposite well-marker pipe
3 meters from north bank.
WR-21
10-19
1500
9.5
500
100 meters downstream from WR-20.
D-22
10-19
1607
11 .0
2030
Highway culvert drain at west end
of marshy area around well.
WR-23
10-19
1510
9.5
600
75 meters downstream from WR-21
and 12 meters downstream from dis-
charge D-22.
WR-24
10-19
1518
9.5
550
150 meters upstream of USGS gaging
station (WR-26).
26
-------
Table 3 - page 3
Station Date Time
oc >imhos/cm
Temp. Conduc.
Location
WR-25
WR-26
WR-27
WR-28
VJR-1
CU-34
II
D-35
D-36
II
CU-29
WR-30
WR-31
¦Progressive Downstream Order-
10-19
10-18
10
1524
1500
1844
19 0712
9.5
11.0
1209
1620
1845
10-20 0745
1240
10-19 1640
9.0
7.0
9.0
10-19 1650 9.0
10-18 1650 10.5
10-19 1220
10-18 1610
10-19 0910
10-19 0915
10-18 1610
9.5
8.0
8.0
545
525
500
465
445
440
485
480
480
550
525
510
500
530
505
475
485
8000
5280
610
**3700
10-20 0917 8.0 **3050
10-19 1716 10.0 4620
10-19 1721 9.0 *** 595
60 meters upstream of WR-26.
North bank at downstream USGS
gaging station bridge.
N-l/4-pt.
Mid-pt.
S-l/4-pt.
South bank.
Mid-point of stream.
1/4 point from North bank.
Mid-point of stream.
300 meters downstream from WR-26.
120 meters downstream from WR-27.
Mid-point of river at bridge on
private driveway.
Curtis Creek upstream of confluence
with ditch overflow.
Irrigation ditch at inverted siphon
under Curtis Creek.
Irrigation ditch overflow into
Curtis Creek.
Curtis Creek - 15 meters upstream
of confluence with White River.
18 meters downstream of Curtis
Creek confluence.
10-19 1730 9.0
560 Midway between WR-1 and WR-0.
27
-------
Table 3 - page 4
Station Date Time T^p ^nduc" Location
-Progressive Downstream Order-
WR-0
10-18
1547
11.5
465
North bank of stream at bridge
near Veterinary Bldg.
II
11
II
11
475
Mid-pt.
\\
U
\\
tt
500
South bank.
II
10-19
1342
10.0
490
Mid-point of river.
CC-32
10-19
1805
10.5
1590
Coal Creek at County Road #6 bridge.
CC-33
10-19
1815
10.0
1490
Coal Creek at highway #132 bridge.
Flow of Coal Creek 5.7 cfs measured upstream of confluence
with White River
*At these locations the river channel at which the conductivity was
measured carried only about 3/4 of the full river flow.
**May include effects of Curtis Creek contamination at measuring point.
***Conductivity measurement made in a secondary river channel containing
only about 1/4 of the full river flow.
NOTE: Rain began falling at 1400 hours and continued throughout the after-
noon of 10-19-72, causing increased flow at D-22 and, thereby, higher con-
ductivities than normal at downstream stations.
28
-------
ro
l£>
J ...J_.
FIGURE 5
SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE MEASURED
IN WHITE RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES
NEAR MEEKER, COLORADO 18-20
OCTOBER 1972
(Also shows results of 3-5 May 72
and 15 Oct 71 surveys by Colorado)
KEY'
%
D "7
SPCCIFIC CONDUCTANCE OF
SAL I ME INFLOW TO WHITE RIVER
W1TK FLOW (OCT 72).* 11 ters/min
SALINE INFLOW TO WHITE RIVER
BETWEEN TWO SAMPLING LOCATIONS
OCTOBER 1972 DATA.
KAY 1972 DATA.
OCTOBER 1971 OATA.
AVERAGE OF PEAS'jflEMENTS MACE
ACROSS CHANNEL AT THIS
LOCATION.
i j I 5
APPROXIMATE DISTANCE GOWiTREAft OF 3TATI0H ALO'IG W!TE RIVER
10 II . ...
7 "UCS
c i lC^eters
- \
i
-------
TABLE 4
CHEMICAL DATA FOR WHITE RIVER
Samples
Concentrations and Flow
Location
#2 - White River,
0.4-km upstream of
Coal Creek, at farm
bridge.
18 Oct 72 (mq/1)
Flow
(cfs)
19
Dct 72 (mq/1)
Flow
[cfs)
Na
CI
so4l
TDS
Na
CI
so4
TDS
3.7
2.7
61
230
544
3.7
1.7
62
238
512
#1 - White River,
1.9-km upstream of
Meeker, due south of
Rte. 13-789 and 132
junction, at bridge.
18.0
21.7
77
294
552
18.5
22.7
78
294
514
#0 - White River,
0.5-km upstream of
Meeker, 1.4-km down-
stream of #1 and
0.8-km downstream of
Curtis Creek.
19.0
21.2
84
302
508
30
-------
Figure 6 presents some detailed measurements of specific
conductance performed across the channel at location "8," 30
meters downstream of the confluence of the White Riyer and Coal
Creek, at location 26, at the downstream gaging station about 450
meters downstream of the culvert drain from the Meeker Well area of
seepage, and at location "0," on the White Riyer about 1000 meters
downstream of its confluence with Curtis Creek. These data verify
the higher concentrations of dissolved solids along the east or
north banks, near the areas of seepage. The data also show a
minor variation in conductance with time over the three-day period.
With respect to Figures 5 and 6, it is important to note that
the position of the conductance measurement relative to the river
bank and the amount of the White River in the particular channel
receiving the seepage caused some apparent variations in specific
conductance at certain locations. In progressive downstream order,
station 8 (606 jjmhos/cm, ave,) measured the impact of Coal Creek
across 75 percent of the channel (also, a cow had stirred the
water shortly before some measurements); station 10 (1010 jjmhos/cm)
also measured only 75 percent of the flow and was a single, "near-
bank" measurement. Similarly, station 30 measured the impact of
Curtis Creek on only 25 percent (approximately) of the total flow
of the White River at that point. These factors may result in
deceptively high conductance at these points, but have no bearing
on the measurement of the overall trend in salinity throughout the
reach since measurements of this trend were made across the entire
channel in well-mixed areas of the White River.
A check of the relationship between the specific conductance
measurements and laboratory determinations of total dissolved
solids (TDS) indicates that the two measurements agree fairly well
using a ratio of TDS to conductance equal to 0.625.
The salinity data gathered in October (1972) show that the
White River, as it passes along the south flank of the Meeker Dome,
experiences an increase in salinity of 27 percent during the
conditions obtaining. This increase is comprised of 21 tons per
day (tpd) of sodium (5.2. tpd Na at location #2 to 26.0 tpd Na at
location #1), 29 tpd of chloride (3.1 tpd to 31.7 tpd) and 24 tpd
of sulphate (87.7 tpd to 111.4 tpd); thereby contributing to an
increase of 89 tpd of dissolved solids {331 tpd to 420 tpd). As
shown in Table 5, this increase along the White River appears
significantly less than was measured prior to August, 1968 (the date
the Meeker Well was plugged). The comparison of increases should
be qualified due to the fact that while the upstream station
location remains approximately the same for pre- and post- plugging
sampling, our October data for the downstream station were collected
upstream of Meeker and of Curtis Creek while the other, long term
31
-------
wrwmwffiE
LINEAR AND TRANSIENT VARIATIONS
IN SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE DURING
OCTOBER, 1972 SURVEY
-------
TABLE 5
COMPARISON OF INCREASE IN SALINITY MEASURED IN OCTOBER 1972
WITH THAT MEASURED PRIOR TO PLUGGING THE MEEKER WELL
LOADINGS
co
GJ
Salinity
Parameter
Average
Increase in Load »
October 1964 to June 1966'''
Increase in Load
October 1972^)
Na
55
tons per day
21
tons per day
CI
65
li ll II
29
ll ll ll
so4
80
ll II ll
24
ll ll ll
TDS
280
ll ll ll
89
it ri ri
Na
CI
so4
TDS
CONCENTRATIONS
Salinity White River Below Meeker
Parameter Oct '64 thru Jul '68 (mg/1)
White River Below Meeker
Aug '68 - Oct '713>
(AverageT
52
61
147
477
(Range)
19-88
18-100
57-240
236-801
(AverageT
19
15
122
355
White River Upstream
of Meeker - October '72 (mg/1)
(Range) (Average!"
6-29 18
4-26 22
39-174 78
167-428 294
4)
1) Calculated from 12 measurements; White River upstream of Coal Creek to White River "below" Meeker.
2) Calculated from 2 measurements: White River 0.4-km upstream of Coal Creek, and White River 2-km
upstream of Meeker.
3) Bureau of Reclamation.
4) Upstream of Curtis Creek.
-------
100
90
80
70
60
50
<*0
30
20
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
FIGURE 7
AVERAGE ANNUAL SODIUM AND
CHLORIDE CONCENTRATIONS IN
WHITE RIVER "NEAR WATSON,
UTAH" 1960-1972
;o
1965
1970
YEAR
-------
data, were/are gathered from downstream of Meeker. In other words,
a further increase in salinity may be expected from the point of
the October "downstream" collection to the long-term station "below"
Meeker. However, we have assumed this downstream increase to be
small when compared with the apparent differences in concentrations
before and after plugging.
Comparison of sodium chloride, sulphate, and dissolved solids
data reveals no discernable trend in the concentrations after the
plugging of the Meeker Well. In other words, the data in our
possession do not show an increase in salinity in the White River
in the period following the plugging of the Meeker Well. As shown
in Table 5, the data gathered in October of 1972 appear to fit
within the range of previously measured (yet post-plugging) concen-
trations, recognizing that the October measurements were made during
a period of relatively low flow.
Further comparison of sodium and chloride concentrations at a
sampling location in the White River in Utah (some considerable
distance downstream from Meeker) also fails to reveal any definitive
increase in sodium or chloride since the "Meeker Well" was plugged
(Figure 7.) We recognize the problems inherent in making such a comparison
of concentrations especially when inadequate flow data are available,
We should also mention, as shown in Figure 5, that Coal Creek
carries water with an appreciably-high specific conductance well
upstream of Highway 132 and east of the field affected by the
"eastermost" system. The Mancos Shale undoubtedly causes much of
this "salinity."
Results of Reconnaissance Drainage Investigation on Upper Prather
Property (Seepage Area #4)
The Bureau of Reclamation performed a reconnaissance drainage
investigation in Sections 28 and 30, TIN, R93W, in late June of
1972 and reported on this investigation in September, 1972.
(Enclosure to letter from Acting Regional Director, Bureau of
Reclamation, Region 4, to John A. Green, Regional Administrator,
EPA, Region VIII, dtd. 8Sep72).
The report covers the drilling of four hand-auger holes to
depths of three to four meters and the analysis of water and soil.
The purpose of the effort was to obtain information relative to the
feasibility of draining and reclaiming the Prather tracts of land
located south of Colorado Highway 132 and north of Coal Creek. It
is reported that the soils encountered contained up to 3.28 percent
dissolved solids. The report concludes that "draining and reclaiming
the salt-affected portions of the Prather property would be rather
35
-------
difficult, costly, and would inyolye complex .measures necessary to
restore the land to a productive status." The conclusion is based
on the apparent complexity of the leaching and drain system en-
visioned to be necessary by the Bureau ( a function of low
permeabilities and deep (4m) "penetration" of salts). The estimated
cost of installing a subsurface drain is $25,000.
The Bureau report projected an annual discharge (from the
leaching process) to the White River of 110 tons of salt (T.D.S),
annually. This compares with a calculated increase of 89 tons per
day measured along the White River in October. The report also
states that the water-bearing strata were encountered at depths
between 4 and 6 feet (1.2 to 1.8 meters) in all four holes and that
water in the two upslope holes showed a "slight" artesian rise."
Conductance measurements of water encountered in these holes shows
a decrease in salinity in the downslope direction (southward).
(The four wells were located along an irregular vector leading
generally south from Colorado Highway 132 toward Coal Creek -
Figure 8). As has been suggested by the location of the seepage,
the source of the saline seepage is to the north of the Prather
field. It should also be pointed out that the two upslope holes
encountered "appreciable amounts of raw shale fragments in the soil."
This shale is most likely from the Mancos Formation and high salinity
can be produced by seepage through these shales.
Summary
Essentially three divisions of field effort have been reported
here. These are (1) the aerial infrared photography, (2) the
measurement of specific electrical conductance and selected salinity
parameters, and (3) the investigation of the feasibility of re-
claiming the formerly-irrigated field currently degraded by saline
ground water. All efforts were conducted in a cooperative manner
with the Colorado Water Conservation Board, The Bureau of Reclamation,
The Colorado Department of Health-Water Pollution Control Division,
The U.S. Geological Survey, and EPA.
The infrared photography vividly portrays the land degradation
in the eastern-most area of seepage, a formerly-irrigated field. The
photography also shows significant seepage from the northern edge of
the Meeker Dome near and downstream of an abandoned and plugged well
(Kritsas #1). Equally detrimental seepage in other areas was not
evident. It seems noteworthy that significant land degradation was
not seen downslope from Coal Creek in the eastern-most area of seepage.
Measurements of salinity parameters in the vicinity of the
Meeker Dome during October of 1972 indicated a daily pickup in load
of dissolved solids of 89 tons per day along the reach of the White
River from upstream of Coal Creek to upstream of (near) Curtis Creek.
36
-------
FIGURE 8
LOCATION OF AUGER HOLES AND POSSIBLE SUBSURFACE
DRAIN - SEEPAGE AREA ffh. after Bureau of Recla-
mation, 8Sep72
37
-------
Sodium and chloride concentrations increased by 80 to 90 percent
along the reach. The major contributor to this increase was Coal
Creek, though high specific electrical conductance was also
measured in irrigation return flows in flow from drainage ditches
which included ground water seepage, and in Coal Creek upstream of
known areas of seepage. Conductance was highest in Curtis Creek
which drains the north and western portions of the Meeker Dome in
addition to receiving a major portion of its drainage from the
north (of the Meeker Dome).
The concentrations measured (Na, CI, SO4, TDS) for White River
samples and flows recorded in October 1972 appeared to fit with other
post- "Meeker Well" plugging measurements and to show no upward trend
in salinity in the White River. However, the lack of long-term data
makes this conclusion tenuous.
The results of the reclamation investigation did not indicate
that it would be practicable to reclaim the field due to the
necessary complexity of the leaching and drain system. However, the
investigation report indicated that the ground water was found be-
tween 1.2 and 1.8 meters below the ground surface. The investigation
did not cover the western-most seep, that affecting an irrigation
canal and access road.
Field investigations by representatives of the U.S.G.S. and the
Colorado Water Conservation Board have established the location of
three other wells on the Dome, one of which (The Marl and Well) is
not plugged and has experienced a rise in water level. It has also
been learned that saline, warm springs existed in the area prior to
1900.
Conclusions
The question of the Meeker Dome seepage has been related to
what, if any, relationship exists between the "Meeker Well," as
plugged, and the seepage of ground water. Based on the data at hand
and the experience of the investigating parties, we conclude that
the plugged "Meeker Well" has the same relationship to the seeps as
do all other plugged wells in the area. That is, the plugging of all
wells that intercepted aquifers has removed the artificial pressure
relief channels formed by the unplugged wells such that naturally
saline ground water is again under sufficient pressure to force it to
the surface through natural fractures in a manner similar to that
existing prior to the drilling. Replugging the wells will not achieve
a reduction in seepage if these fractures intercept the aquifers as
they appear to do.
38
-------
It is possible, that certain wells, eyen in their "plugged"
state serve to connect the deeper aquifers such as the Weber
Formation, with shallower formations, such as the Morrison. In
fact, a recently-drilled well (#1 Anderson-Dyco Petroleum)
encountered water near the base of the Morrison in October of 1972
and in the Entrada Formation. Flows from about .14 cms to about
1.4 cms were encountered in the lower Morrison and Entrada. Water
is not normally considered as present in any great quantity at the
base of the Morrison though the Morrison has sufficient sands to
make it an adequate aquifer if waters are available.
Recent salinity measurements show a pickup of salts through the
area of seepage resulting in a pickup of sodium chloride, sulphate,
and dissolved solids along the White River. But these increases
appear to be substantially less than the increases occurring before
plugging of the Meeker Well. An hypothesis has been advanced that
the salinity increase may return the White River salinity level
equal to that measured before plugging. Our single set of samples
can not support this hypothesis since the post-plugging concentra-
tions appear to be consistent after plugging and well below those
measured prior to plugging.
While it appears feasible to reduce the impact of seepage on the
irrigation ditch and access road at Seepage Area 1, the Bureau of
Reclamation has reported that reclamation of the Seepage Area 4 and
restoration to its pre-seepage condition would be difficult. While
adequate exploration of this Area 4 to determine whether the seepage
comes from below the field and percolates upward or whether the
seepage originates from the vicinity of Colorado Highway 132 and
percolates down-gradient has not been initiated, it does appear
appropriate to conclude that the system is sufficiently complex so
as to preclude additional extensive and expensive studies. We should
keep in mind that the feasibility of intercepting seepage upstream
of the Seepage Area 4 and constant flushing with "good" water has not
been tested.
Finally, we conclude that further investigations, other than
those listed below, are not warranted at this time.
Recommendations
The only recommendations of a technical nature considered
appropriate at this time are the following:
(1) Selected salinity and flow data should be collected
from two White River locations upstream and down-
stream of the drainage from the Meeker Dome for at
least two years to determine whether or not the
seepage will increase in either flow rate or salinity
39
-------
parameter concentrations and thereby cause a
deterioration in the quality of the White River.
Plans should be developed to permit access to the
irrigation ditch at Seepage Area 1.
The Marland Well should be monitored routinely
unless there is sufficient flow from this well to
indicate the need to consider plugging.
If monies are available for the drilling and com-
pletion of two holes, each about 30 meters deep
and located upslope and downslope of Seepage
Area 4, it may (consider the use of the word "may")
be possible to determine whether water entering
this Area comes from beneath the area or from above
(upslope of) the area. EPA cannot presently
identify any of its funds for this investigatory
effort.
In lieu of determining the exact flow system that
directs local seepage in Area 4 (Upper Prather
tract), changes in the extent and nature of the
seepage should be recorded routinely.
Certain factors relating to geologic instabilities
of the south flank of the Meeker Dome should be
brought to the attention of the Colorado Department
of Natural Resources. The appropriate participants
in this study may wish to do this quite soon if
their observations are confirmed.
40
-------
r-7'
I/-'1"'
1 ¦ •• S . ¦ ' !' 1'(
K -vv. fh/:s
' V ^'WA/A'¦ !
> <'c0':i k.- \f
i \ »T«. , -\0<. r'7^.S'. ¦ I f
i, 7.\\V«yi^ ' l-\'
-- ^;l\\, ;,\y i.'.
^ ^ o.'r 'w
1 ' V-/1-
' V I1! n • ^ /V ^ >f' 'iSam^ ^ v
260 000
"*~'/r\\\ ' ni
UiiLiY/
1 KtLOMETEH
i >
"33
CONTOUR INTERVAL 40 FEET
DOTTED LINES REPRESENT 20 FOOT CONTOURS
DATUW "iS MtAH StA LtVtV.
V v
-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY
------- |