7620 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

White River.C6) 2.1.1.5.3 The White River water resources are currently under study by the U.S. Geologi ca L Survey. Water Resource Division . Pre limi na ry results of the study indicate that the alluvial aquifer in the Rangely area is much smaller than anticipated. Water quality has been-found to be poor, except immediately adjacent to or beneath the White River. Well yields have also been found to be poor. Drilling for oil and gas in the Rangely Oil Field has `further reduced the potable water supply available in the alluvium. Groundwater in the Rangely area. is more fully described in Chapter 4, Section 4.8.2. 2.1.1.5.4 Continued development of the Rangely Oil Field will likely increase the water quality problems now being experienced by shallow groundwater users in the area. After examining the long-term needs of Rangely and the- expected degradation of the limited alluvial aquifer beneath the White River flood plain. it does not appear that this source is suitable for municipal supply. Any use of alluvial groundwater should be confined to the area immediately adjacent to or beneath the White River in an infiltration gallery. In effect, this arrangement would be an improved surface-water diversion, with a portion of the sand/gravel aquifer serving as a filter. This alternative is evaluated in Section 2.6. 2.1.1.5.5 Sedimentary units above the main body of the Mancos shale CCastlegate Sandstone, Sego Sandstone, and the Mesa Verde Group] represent the only potential bedrock aquifer in the Rangely area. Unfortunately, Rangely is located on the axis of an eroded anticline which plunges gradually eastward.(6] Mesa Verde Group sediments are exposed north and south of the White River, dipping away from the town. This places Rangely very near the recharge areas for these potential aquifers, decreasing the likelihood of obtaining an adequate water supply from a well within several miles of the town limits. Local drillers indicate that these strata contain very little water and that yields of wells which have been completed are less than 5 gallons per minute C0.3 L/s].C11,18) If municipal wells were constructed to obtain water from the Mesa Verde Group, a mini mum of 3 miles C4.8 km] of pipeline would be required. The cost for this alternative has been roughly estimated at X12 million. The essumptione made were that eighty-five wells would be required and that the yield per well would be 20 gal lone per minute3C1.2 L/s). Th~ total yield would be 4 cfs or 2900 AF per year [0.1 m /s or 3.5 X 10 m ) per year]. On this basis this alternative was not considered further es a viable alternative. ' 2.2 ALTERNATIVE A: Taylor Drar Da^ El. 5329 [1624a] (Applicants' Preferred) ~, 2.2.1 Location and a eral Descrig ion 2.2.1 .1 The proposed Taylor Draw Dam would be located on the White River approximately five miles [8 km) northeast of Rangely, Colorado in Section 27, Township 2 North, Range 101 West. 6th Principal -8-