Laserfiche WebLink
D. Bredehoeft. In their 1988 study, Belitz and Bredehoeft recognized the existence of a <br /> faulting system commonly known as the"Golden Fault,"running from Colorado Springs <br /> to the general vicinity of the city of Boulder, and concluded that this faulting system <br /> created a hydraulic disconnect between the formation outcrop, located within the Front <br /> Range upthrown fault block, and the Denver-Julesburg Basin downthrown fault block. <br /> All of the evidence supported the existence of this hydraulic disconnect. Certain parties <br /> to this rulemaking who generally object to adoption of the proposed rule for the Denver- <br /> Julesburg Basin contended that the displacement of the Golden Fault is insufficient to <br /> create complete hydraulic disconnection between the subject formations and the <br /> formation outcrop areas. However, there was no evidence presented to support this <br /> assertion. Dr. Snow's testimony, in particular, addresses how clay smearing along the <br /> faults at issue results in hydraulic disconnection between the fault blocks. Indeed, Chris <br /> Sanchez, P.G., and Scott Mefford, C.P.G., experts retained by the parties objecting to <br /> adoption of a rule for the Denver-Julesburg Basin, acknowledged the existence of the <br /> Golden Fault, and admitted that the Golden Fault creates a hydraulic disconnect <br /> between the formation outcrop area and delineated nontributary area for that part of <br /> the delineated nontributary area south of Boulder. <br /> The objecting parties also asserted that the Golden Fault has generally been <br /> understood as ending in the vicinity of Boulder, and argued that there is no evidence <br /> that the hydraulic disconnect extends to the north beyond that point. However, Drs. <br /> Weimer and Snow testified that, in the vicinity of Boulder and running northwards to <br /> Wyoming, the faulting system changes in character from the more continuous Golden <br /> Fault to an intricate series of overlapping thrust and wrench faults. Drs. Weimer and <br /> Snow provided convincing testimony that, notwithstanding this change in the general <br /> character of the faulting system, as a result of the intertwined and overlapping nature <br /> and pattern of the faults, as well as the greater than two-mile magnitude of the overall <br /> throw, the faulting system continues to act as a hydraulic barrier to ground water flow <br /> between the subject formations within the designated nontributary area and the <br /> formation outcrop areas. This testimony was supported by Dr. Weimer's extensive <br /> knowledge of and studies and field work within the Denver-Julesburg Basin. Dr. <br /> Weimer specifically referred to two west-east geologic cross-sections, including a <br /> west-east geologic cross section for a location north of Boulder, included in a 1997 <br /> publication by Dr. Weimer, and a cross-section located near the Colorado-Wyoming <br /> Border. Dr. Weimer testified that these cross-sections demonstrate that the faulting <br /> system continues north of Boulder to Wyoming, creating a hydraulic barrier between <br /> the outcrop and the delineated nontributary area running from Boulder to the <br /> Wyoming border. <br /> The objecting parties assert that the cross-sections relied upon by Dr. Weimer in his <br /> analysis are evidence only of localized structure, rather than continuity of faulting, <br /> and thus did not provide evidence of any continuous north-south trending fault <br /> extending north of Boulder. The State Engineer finds Dr. Weimer's testimony,based <br /> upon his years of study, observation, and field work, and supported by his <br /> Produced Nontributary Ground Water Rules 2 CCR 402-17, Statement of Basis and Purpose <br /> -30- <br />