My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL41679
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL41679
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:10:01 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 11:20:26 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
3/3/1998
Doc Name
WEST ELK GEOCHEMICL ASSESSMENT OBSERVATIONS AND INTERPRETATIONS
From
DMG
To
DAVE BERRY
Permit Index Doc Type
EXPLORATION
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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).
View images
View plain text
III IIIIIIIIIIIII III <br />STATE OF COLGw-~w <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Dcpanmcnl ui Natural Resources <br />1 711 Sherman SL, Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 80207 <br />Vhunc: 1 SO71 866-7567 <br />FAR: ISOlI 87?8106 <br />DATE: March 3, 1998 <br />TO: Dave Berry <br />FROM: Harry Posey <br />RE: West Elk Geochemical Assessme bservations and Interpretations <br />The attached DRAFT Report contains changes from my Febtvary 25 memo. This report <br />I~~ <br />DEPARTMENT OF <br />NATURAL <br />RESOURCES <br />Roy Romer <br />Governor <br />tames 5 Lochhezd <br />E.eculive Direaw <br />Michael B. Long <br />Divismn Duecw~ <br />provides a simple model to explain the data surrounding the West Elk situation. Unequivocally, <br />Dr. Mayo's interpretation is not the only p{ausible explanation of the data, nor is it the simplest. <br />The current report's interpretations, if regarded, deserve at least some mass-balance calculations <br />as a check on their adequacy, but overall the report provides a reasonable hypothesis which <br />seems consistent with all the information. <br />To accept or dismiss Dr. Mayo's interpretations outright would require further sampling along <br />with clarification of some of the data we have already. Frankly, [ do not think this is necessary. <br />Despite some of the shortcomings, West Elk and Dr. Mayo have developed an incredible data <br />set, and we have enough information already to make awell-supported interpretation. Although <br />I did not set out to do so, the alternative model supports the Division's interpretations that the <br />fault and sump waters are the source of the Edwards Portal seep water. This interpretation seems <br />to incorporate more of the data, has multiple avenues of support, and is compatible with the <br />probable hydrologic consequences predictions. It is simpler because it requires only mixing of <br />the fault waters with meteoric water to explain the vaziations in chemical compositions between <br />the fault and seep waters. <br />This is a summary document only. If you wish, I can develop a background presentation on <br />isotope geochemistry and the mixing model that will help explain it further, but the report should <br />be readable to Dr. Mayo and others in its present form. If you would like to discuss any of the <br />work with me, or if you have edits, please let me know. I would look forwazd to a discussion of <br />the isotope data with the group, if you think that would help. <br />cc: Mike Boulay <br />Susan McCannon <br />Jim Burnell <br />Jim Pendleton <br />m:\m in\hhp\westelk2.doc <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.