My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1999-12-15_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - M1999051
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Minerals
>
M1999051
>
1999-12-15_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - M1999051
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/25/2021 7:44:03 AM
Creation date
10/24/2011 1:07:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1999051
IBM Index Class Name
GENERAL DOCUMENTS
Doc Date
12/15/1999
Doc Name
Memos and Letters
From
DRMS
To
Various
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
108
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
Allen Sorenson: <br />Well, we've seen that with some of the wells drilled by American Soda, some hiccups in <br />those what have always been assumed to be the gradient. The hydrologic gradients have <br />always been the same way. Maybe they got the lower aquifer going a little bit in that <br />direction. <br />Jerry Daub: <br />Is that credible data? <br />Paul Daggett: <br />Let's not go there. <br />Roger Day: <br />I think there's wide acceptance of the rate of the movement in the B aquifer is very, very <br />slow. Most estimates I'm aware of are in the 2Y2, 3, 5, 10 ft per year type movement. Is that <br />consistent with your knowledge? <br />Allen Sorenson: <br />Actually, in the modeling done by Robson was, I think, about 100 or greater. <br />Roger Day: <br />Of the references, that might be the other extreme, but still it's very slow. We're talking <br />maybe 30 years for detection downgradient. Basically, we've got to protect ourselves by <br />detecting bubbles rather than plumes. That's what the movement seems to be. If we went <br />downgradient and put in a whole bunch of wells, and we sat there and waited for it to move <br />to us, that'd be silly. By the time we saw it, it'd be too late. <br />Allen Sorenson: <br />I'd like to suggest something. We're talking about tools to put into that dissolution surface. <br />I suggest measuring temperature as well. If you're going to do water level at the dissolution <br />surface then do the temperature with a tool down there as well. Because you're going to be <br />in there checking the dissolution surface and that would be a good indicator if you have any <br />cavity water getting into the aquifer. <br />Roger Day: <br />Is it an easy one to prevent drifts and so on? It's a tool, but I don't know. <br />Allen Sorenson: <br />Yes, you shouldn't have any problem with that. <br />Roger Day: <br />To get an accurate piezometer —it's only a percentage of it's range —so you can only get it <br />down, the really good ones, about 10 ft under the water level, but they're very accurate. <br />Then if you have another wire that goes down below and you're going to get multiple wire in <br />the hole and when you go to recover one to check it, it's going to get tangled. I want to see a <br />real need before we put a second instrument downhole. <br />25 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.