My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Proposal for Pilot Evaporation Pond
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
8001-9000
>
Proposal for Pilot Evaporation Pond
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/13/2016 10:15:47 AM
Creation date
10/13/2016 10:15:45 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
Related to CRSP MOA
State
CO
Basin
Statewide
Author
Paradox Valley Unit
Title
Proposal for Pilot Evaporation Pond
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Budget
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Paradox Valley Unit <br /> Proposal for Evaporation Pond <br /> water pipelines, access roads, powerlines,telephone and communication cables, a <br /> temporary brine disposal pond, and the Paradox Valley Field Station Office. In <br /> addition,there are 17 seismic monitoring stations scattered around western <br /> Montrose County, Colorado, extreme eastern Utah, and on Forest Service lands. <br /> The majority of the facilities are on lands owned by Reclamation. A portion of <br /> the project is on public lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management <br /> (BLM), and is included in a right-of-way reservation to Reclamation. <br /> A network of 15 seismic stations was installed in 1985 to measure seismic activity <br /> in the area before commencing brine injection operations. The data showed <br /> almost no seismic activity from 1985 to 1990. Both the frequency and magnitude <br /> of local seismic events increased after well injection began in 1990. On May 27, <br /> 2000, a M4.3 earthquake was induced by injection well operations. In response to <br /> this earthquake,the injection rate was reduced from 300 gpm to 230 gpm. <br /> Between 1996 and 1999, the well was shut down once annually for routine <br /> maintenance. Seismic data showed that the frequency of the seismic events <br /> declined substantially immediately following the annual shut down of injecting <br /> operations. From this data, it was apparent that periodically suspending <br /> operations allows the pressures to dissipate within the injection reservoir, directly <br /> correlating to a reduction in earthquake activity. Since learning this, injection has <br /> been ceased for a twenty day period twice per year, and brine has continued to be <br /> injected at the lower rate of 230 gpm. The two twenty day shut downs annually <br /> and reduced injection rate contributed to a reduction of seismicity from 1,142 <br /> recorded events in 1999 to 102 recorded events in 2005. <br /> At present, 100%brine is pumped into the well at a rate of 230 gpm and injected <br /> at required surface injection pressures of over 4,900 psi. The current Maximum <br /> Allowable Surface Injection Pressure(MASIP)of the facility is 5,350 psi. The <br /> well head was upgraded in the fall of 2009 to increase MASIP from 5,000 to <br /> 5,350. <br /> The injection well continues to intercept and dispose of up to 115,000 tons of salt <br /> per year and remains a cost-effective method to control salinity in the Colorado <br /> River(via the Dolores River). The well was projected to effectively store salt for <br /> another 10 years provided that acceptable levels of seismicity and well integrity <br /> are maintained. However,due to the history of seismic activity,there is a great <br /> deal of uncertainty about continuing future benefits of the deep well injection <br /> method for salt disposal. Increasingly higher injection pressures may contribute <br /> to more frequent and significant seismic activity in the near future. Increases in <br /> the magnitude of induced seismicity and/or deteriorating well conditions could <br /> cause current usefulness to decline gradually or quickly, depending on the nature <br /> of the problem. A portion of the well shaft may have already experienced <br /> seismically induced differential displacement, as evidenced by an offset in the <br /> well's inner liner that prevented full diameter logging tools from being passed <br /> through the restriction. The offset was not significant enough to negatively <br /> impact Unit operations. In the event of further deteriorated well conditions or <br /> 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.