HYDRO29443

• Permit No: M1999002
• IBM Index Class Name: Hydrology
• Doc Date: 5/28/1999
• Doc Name: UIC INFO
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

Underground Injection Control Branch Guidance No. 5 _
~f i •
wysi wyg://35/htt p://w w w.epa.gov/reg5 oh 2o/u i c/r5_05. htm
•
relative advantages and disadvantages of the various options is provided in the attachments concerning
of the approved methods for demonstrating part 2 of MI.
1. Temperature Logs (TL)
Temperature logs are a very versatile and sensitive means of identifying fluids which have moved aloof
channels adjacent to the well bore. In addition [o demonstrations of part 2 of MI, temperature logs can t
used to monitor fluid movement through the confining zone adjacent to the well bore and can often loci
small casing leaks. To be effective for demonstrations of MI, there must be adequate time available for
short-term temperature effects along the well bore to dissipate. Background information and general
procedures for running temperature logs are provided in Attachment 5.
2. Noise Logs (NL)
The use of noise logs is based on the observation that flow behind the casing in [he well bore will, at so
points, be turbulent. Turbulent flow causes noise which may travel for significant distances along the w
bore. Noise logs are appropriate where it is impractical for injection operations to be suspended for the
length of time needed [o allow temperature stabilization to proceed to the point a[ which a temperature
can be run with good results. They can also be used to locate some tubing or casing leaks. Background
information and procedures for using noise logs to demonstrate part 2 of MI are found in Attachment 6.
3.Oxygen Activation Method (OAL)
On February 1, 1991, [he USEPA published a FR Notice granting final approval, effective March 4, 19!
for use of the oxygen activation method or log (OAL) as a means of demonstrating part 2 of MI. Detail!
the operation and conditions under which the OAL can be used can be found at 4063 et seq. FR 56, No.
which is included in this guidance as Attachment 7.
4. Radioactive Tracer Survey
The same FRNs which describe how the RTS can be used for demonstrating part 1 of MI also describe
use for demonstrating part 2 of MI. This method may be used only where there is only a single confinin
formation separating the lowermost USDW from the injection zone with no aquifers within it. Addition
requirements and limitations of the RTS are described in the previously mentioned FR Notices (See III.
The use of the RTS as a means of demonstrating part 2 of MI is described in Attachment 8.
5. Cement Records
The most common demonstration of part 2 of MI for Class II wells is based on cementing records.
Demonstrations of MI for Class III wells can also be based on cementing records if the configuration of
wells prevents the use of logging methods. If records show that casings are cemented in a way which w.
prevent the movement of liquids into or between USDWs, the well has part 2 of MI. A discussion of tht
use of cementing records is provided in Attachment 9.
C. Additional Mechanical Integrity Tests
Other alternative MITs will be added to this guidance if approved by the Administrator of the EPA for I
in Region 5. In order for a test [o be approved, it must be submitted to the Water Division Director in
Region 5 with all supporting evidence. If the proposal is approved by the Director, then it will be submi
to [he Administrator, and will be evaluated by the national UIC Technical Workgroup which will evalw
its effectiveness. If approved by the Administrator, the approval and any limitations placed on the test v
be promulgated in the Federal Register. In addition, specific procedures outlined in this guidance may b
modified after additional data are obtained or to accommodate a particular type of well construction.
National UIC Guidances #15 and #34 include information relating to approval of alternate methods of
testing mechanical integrity.
5 of 34 528/99 I :09 PM