Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

High Capacity Wells and Groundwater Frac Sand What you need to know to get your permits Dave Johnson Groundwater Section Bureau of Drinking Water and Groundwater.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "High Capacity Wells and Groundwater Frac Sand What you need to know to get your permits Dave Johnson Groundwater Section Bureau of Drinking Water and Groundwater."— Presentation transcript:

1 High Capacity Wells and Groundwater Frac Sand What you need to know to get your permits Dave Johnson Groundwater Section Bureau of Drinking Water and Groundwater

2 What do you need? Decide how much water you need – Maximum capacity and daily average – Potable uses –NN System Design code compliant wells – NR812.12 Submit application – Additional information Follow conditions of the approval

3 Code issues NR 812.9 – Approval for high capacity wells – Test well >6 inches need to notify – Pump test > 72 hours need approval WPDES Discharge Permit NR 812.13 (16) – Wells within 1200 feet <1200 Mine 80 feet deep 30 or 40 feet below quarry 15 feet to top of rock 80 feet of rock to bottom of mine Total depth of casing 15 + 80 + 40 = 135 feet

4 Operational Considerations Inventory of Private Wells Water Quality Data Monitoring Water Table/Pumping Levels Water Balance – Pumping - (precipitation - evaporation) = Groundwater Extraction Know and Monitor Conditions

5 High Capacity Wells Wells, individually or collectively, that can pump > 100,000 gpd (70 gpm) from a single property Used for irrigation, livestock, manufacturing, aquaculture, mining, beverage bottling, homes, and public water supply

6 Groundwater Law in WI Reasonable Use – 1974 - State vs. Michels Pipeline Const., Inc. – A landowner is allowed to withdraw groundwater in any amount, provided it: Is for a beneficial use Does not cause unreasonable harm to another landowner Does not cause direct and substantial effect on a stream or lake ss. 281.34, 281.346 – high capacity well approval and water use permitting in Great Lakes Basin

7 Applicable Regulatory Authorities Ch. NR 820 – Siting and Environmental impacts of High Capacity Wells Ch. NR 812 – Well Construction, Pump Installation Ch. NR 856 – Water Withdrawal Registration and Reporting Ch. NR 860 – Water Use Permitting (Great Lakes Basin)

8 Background High Capacity Well Review prior to 2004 – Meet well construction criteria of Ch. NR 812 – Not adversely impact or reduce the supply of water to any public water utility 2004 Groundwater Quantity Law – Added environmental review criteria to approval process

9 Groundwater Quantity Law (Act 310, NR 820) Environmental review if: – Water loss greater than 95% – In a groundwater protection area Areas within 1,200 feet of – Class 1, 2 or 3 Trout Streams or – designated Outstanding or Exceptional Resource Waters – Result in significant impacts to a spring with normal flow greater than 1 cfs flow

10 Lake Beulah Management District v. DNR, WI 54 (2011) Wis. Supreme Court The Court concluded that the DNR has the authority and a general duty to consider whether a proposed high capacity well may harm waters of the state Further, the Court held that to comply with this general duty, the DNR must consider the environmental impact of a proposed high capacity well when presented with sufficient concrete, scientific evidence of potential harm to waters of the state.

11 Statutory Definition Waters of the State "Waters of the state" includes those portions of Lake Michigan and Lake Superior within the boundaries of this state, and all lakes, bays, rivers, streams, springs, ponds, wells, impounding reservoirs, marshes, watercourses, drainage systems and other surface water or groundwater, natural or artificial, public or private, within this state or its jurisdiction.

12 Implications of Lake Beulah Decision Consideration of impacts on waters of the state – Expanded review of surface waters Outside of GPA ( >1,200 from trout stream, ORW, ERW) Non-GPA waters – all streams, lakes, ponds Wetlands Springs < 1cfs (0.25 cfs) – Private well screening Outside interested parties may compel review by submitting concrete, scientific evidence of potential harm Avoid significant adverse environmental impact Does not address areas of cumulative impacts

13 Significant Adverse Impact (NR 820) Significant adverse environmental impact means alteration of groundwater levels, groundwater discharge, surface water levels, surface water discharge, groundwater temperature, surface water temperature, groundwater chemistry, surface water chemistry, or other factors to the extent such alterations cause significant degradation of environmental quality including biological and ecological aspects of the affected water resource. Case-by-case Qualitative Professional judgment with accepted analytical methods

14 Environmental Review in Practice Continue using Groundwater Quantity Protection Rules (NR 820) – Wells in GPAs – Trout Streams, ORWs, ERWs – Springs >1 cfs – Water loss > 2 million gallons/day – Screening criteria determine potential for adverse impact and need for Environmental Assessment Use same assessment tools: – outside of GPAs, – for other streams, lakes and wetlands – for springs with flow >0.25 cfs (within 2 miles)

15 Environmental Review in Practice Impacts to Public utility wells – Avoid drawdown of 10 ft or greater Private wells – Screen for private wells within 1000 ft – Additional review if projected drawdown at private well is >5 ft

16 Typical Assessment Tools Internal web viewer – Surface Water Features Jenkins-Walton Stream Flow Depletion Spreadsheet Model Theis and Cooper-Jacob Drawdown Models Wisconsin Stream Flow and Habitat Model Fishery Staff survey notes and discharge measurements Well Construction Reports – WGNHS Well Logs Available Geology/Hydrogeology Information Michigan table for allowable stream flow reduction Wisconsin Wetland Inventory, Natural Heritage Inventory Site visits w/ other DNR staff

17 17

18

19

20

21

22 Michigan stream flow reduction guidance (MI DEQ)

23 Does not address areas of cumulative impacts

24 Springs Information DNR field staff knowledge USGS topographic maps County projects Wis. Wildlife Federation Springs Inventory (WGNHS Open File Report 2007-03) Compilation of historic (1920s – 1970s) records and recent research on nearly 11,000 springs Inventory and GIS database Limited field verification

25 WWF Springs Inventory

26 Additional Tools WGNHS – WiscLITH – hydrogeologic data viewer Pumping tests GFLOW models ModFlow Models Water Table Maps

27 Approval Conditions Must prevent significant adverse environmental impact – Specify minimum distance to protected resource – Maximum allowable daily water withdrawal – Reduction in pumping at certain times of year – Pumping schedule restrictions – e.g. every other day, monthly limits – Reduce pumping from other wells on property – Well construction details – deepen, casing into separate aquifer – Monitoring of groundwater and surface water resources – Pumpage Reporting – continuous with telemetric access – Reopen approval based on future information

28 Cumulative Impacts Lake Beulah decision applies to direct impacts of the proposed well and other wells on the same property Does not address impacts of the proposed well cumulatively with other water withdrawals in the area

29 ACT 310 Groundwater Management Areas Two separate areas, one centered on Waukesha and another on Brown County Areas of significant drawdowns and over-pumping of deep aquifer drawdown >150 feet Need for a coordinated management strategy

30 Implications of GMA Designation Very limited for now Requires additional legislation and rule-making Recommendations detailed in Groundwater Advisory Committee Report from 2006 – Local control in concert with land use and water system planning – Groundwater Management Plans with best management practices, standards and goals – Adaptive management approach – Local activities supported with state funds

31 Groundwater Issues Quantity De-watering – Lowering of watertable Changes in flow field – Fluctuating levels High Capacity Wells – NR 820 issues Quality Oxidation – Arsenic and metals Blasting – Sand and rust flakes Spills – Little assimilative capacity Flocculants

32 2011 Frac Sand Water Use Summary based on known industrial sand wells with a capacity > 100 kgpd, that actively pumped during year Number of Wells Average Max Approved Daily Capacity (kGPD) Average Pump Capacity (GPM) Average Daily Pump Capacity (GPD) Average Monthly PumpCapacity (Gal) 178387041014 30,848,082 JanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJune Average 3,771,486 3,372,392 4,381,943 6,009,736 7,208,060 6,742,375 Average Percent of Capacity16%15%17%22%25%24% JulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecemberAnnual Total 7,465,233 5,967,283 6,699,679 6,881,979 5,191,077 4,030,296 64,526,054 25%22%23%24%19%17%19%

33 Groundwater Quality Chemicals Blasting – Turbidity – NO3 Flow related

34 Water Quality Data Groundwater Retrieval Network County Studies USGS/WGNHS/UWSP – Groundwater monitoring network – Groundwater studies Sampling programs

35 Flow Related Radial flow toward the mine – Change flow direction draws contaminants in Influence of pumping high capacity wells Changes in recharge patterns

36 Metals -AMD Sulfides – Tunnel City – Distinct bands in other formations pH Changes – 7.3 to 5.3 in less than 1 Month Examples of potential

37 Tomah Area Original open to Tunnel City – pH – 4.6 - 3 – Sulfate – 1478 ppm – Al – 22630 ppb – Ni – 1232 ppb – Fe – 39.2 Marcasite

38 LaCrosse Al 1600 Cd 2 Co 306 Cu 1610 Fe 53.6 Mn 142 Ni 409

39 La Crosse Al 23200 - 251 Al 23200 - 251 As 38 - ND As 38 - ND Co 501 - ND Co 501 - ND Fe 376 – 1.2 Fe 376 – 1.2 Pb 47 - ND Pb 47 - ND Mn 987 - 55 Mn 987 - 55 Ni 832 - 8 Ni 832 - 8 pH 4.08 – 7.41 pH 4.08 – 7.41 Al 6770 - 6 As 25 - ND Co 306 - ND Fe 150 – 10 Pb 18 - ND Mn 531 - 181 Ni 493 - 8 pH 4.8 – ?

40 LaCrosse Al 67300 As 92 Cr 220 Co 909 Fe 672 Mn 2980 Ni 1750 V 239 Zn 4460

41 PierceAs 2.3 (57) Al12 Cd12.6 Conductivity1120 Fe169 Pb927 Mn1340 Ni1700 Zn20600 SO4560 Core hole all shale to St Peter Water at 280 at top of PDC Related to Rock Elm Disturbance?

42 Causes of Lowered pH AMD/ARD from Sulfide Minerals Jarosite and weathering products Ferric Chloride Plant one pH 5.88 and 5.78 Plant two 5.65 then 7.18

43 Jarosite KFe 3 +3(OH)6(SO4)2. formed by the oxidation of sulfide minerals Usually found as amber- yellow to brown crusts or coatings of minute crystals

44 Exploratory drilling Must be properly filled and sealed – NR 812.26 or NR 141.25 Must be drilled with a method that allows complete filling with approved material Form 3300-005 submitted to department within 30 days (NR 141 – 60 days)

45 Resources USGS Groundwater monitoring network http://wi.water.usgs.gov/public/gw/HISTORICAL/historical.html USGS water quality data http://waterdata.usgs.gov/wi/nwis/qw Wisconsin Geologic and Natural History Survey publications http://www.uwex.edu/wgnhs/pubs.htm Wisconsin Geologic and Natural History Survey WCRs http://www.uwex.edu/wgnhs/well.htm http://www.uwex.edu/wgnhs/well.htm DNR water quality data http://dnr.wi.gov/org/water/dwg/data.htm UWSP http://www.uwsp.edu/cnr-ap/watershed/Pages/wellwaterviewer.aspx DNR well construction data http://prodmtex00.dnr.state.wi.us/pls/inter1/watr$.startup DATCP WCRs http://datcpgis.wi.gov/WellLogs/


Download ppt "High Capacity Wells and Groundwater Frac Sand What you need to know to get your permits Dave Johnson Groundwater Section Bureau of Drinking Water and Groundwater."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google